The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1910-01-11
||)N|M|SS|ON CAN
| DISTRIBUTE CARS
|pscidOn of the United States
'Sunreme Court Is Far-Reach-
Fl, ing in Effect.
RiJLROADS MUST FURNISH
4 SERVICE TO ALL SHIPPERS
|byorite Method of Indirect
4 Discrimination Is Given
Its Death Blow.

DISTINCTION. Jan. 10,-The United
L.,es supreme court today handed down
A decision sustaining the power OF the
L,,rstate Commerce commission to regu-
M the distribution of railroad cars
/-onc coal companies. The decision is
Lrarded BY the government as most i'm
L.r-tant, and it is expected to have an I'M
Irtant bearing on the rate cases to be
|.srd by the court.
n IN announcing the decision Justice
|<hItc considered two objections to the
\, first being that no such delegation
IA been made by the interstate COM
.-srce law in the matter OF the distribu-
.o1 OF company fuel cars as a means OF
Inference and undue discrimination. and
~ second being that even II such power
koud be delegated. the order Issued by
~ court below was beyond the authority
inferred by the law.
n Objections Not Sustained.
/ Inc first objection. he said, rested OH
Ihs erroneous assumption that commerce.
"a the constitutional sense. embraced only
hlpment in technical sense, and did
a therefore extend TO carriers engaged
Il Interstate commerce.
n sIi may not be doubted" he said. that
Ee equipment OF raiirond company en-,
|ceed in Interstate commerce. included
a which are its coal ears. are instru-
|rsnts OF such commerce.
From this IL necessarily follows that
|rch cars are embraced within the gov
|'mmental powers OF regulation. which
|riends In time of car shortage TO COM
|,sHng a just and equal distribution and
IL prevention OF an unjust and discrmi-
2toyy one
OF The second contention. Justice White
lid: The construction with the Inter
|nte commerce act had necessitated and
y remedial character of an amendment
0bpted in 1906. all served 10 establish
Es want OF merit in the contention. In
|!tIion, 10 adopt IL would require us TO
ID that congress. in enlarging the
|tser over rates, had so drafted the
|nendment as TO cripple and paralyZe
|fences and Determinations. which IL
|ps the great and fundamental purpose
i congress 10 further
Vital Points Involved.
As the suit was originally instituted by
|nos Central and other railroads in the
|laos coal fields. the courts were asked
q enJon the enforcement of the inter-
|5te Commerce commissions order as II
|plled 10 the distribution of the fuel
|Fs OF foreign railroads. private cars of
der shippers. as we'll as the cars en-
|cyed by the initial railroad companies
-kmselves in hauling their own fuel.
/ The United States circuit court of the
[<thern district OF Illinois sustained the
|nmIssion In regard 10 the first two
|zsses. but granted an injunction re-
yrnns the enforcement OF the regu-
Non with reference to the company
med cars This. therefore. was the
%'y point involved In today's decision
- or that point the supreme court re-
|rsed the trial court. In addition an
P1ncng in broad terms Its support OF
y power of the commission in the mat
The cases OF the Baltimore g. Ohio rail-
I'd company versus the Pitcairn Coal
/rpany. involving II complaint OF un-
nal distribution OF cars among indie
|ndent coal operators in West Virginia
Hs technically decided in favor OF the
|lrpsd company In that the decision of
- United States circuit court OF appeals
II tne fourth circuit was reversed. This
Hon. however. was taken only on the
|pund that the complaint should have
IN made originally to the Interstate
rnmerce commission instead OF TO the
Kn-fy