The Ely miner. [volume] (Ely, Minn.) 1895-1986, 1910-06-03
Is WESTERN LINES ARE HIT BY
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
ORDER.
CANNOT RAISE FREIGHT RATES
Issued by Federal Judge IN Missouri
at Understands Request.-Ac-
ton Follows Conference.
With Taft.
Railroads Affected.

The Missouri Pacific Railway
company.
Chicago & Northwestern Rail-
way company.
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy
Railroad company.
Chicago, Rock Island and Pa
cific Railway company.
Wabash Railroad company.
Chicago, Milwaukee e. st. Paul
Railway company.
Illinois Central Railroad COM
'pany.
Chicago & Alton Railroad COM
pany.
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe
Railroad company.
Chicago Great Western Railway
company.
Missouri, Kansas e. Texas Rail.
way company.
st. Louis and San Francisco
Railroad company.
Quincy, Omaha and Kansas City
Railroad company.
St. Paul e. Des Moines Railroad
company.
Minneapolis & st. Louis Rail-
road company.
Iowa Central Railroad company.
Fl. Dodge, Des Moines & South
ern Railroad company.
Chicago, st. Paul, Minneapolis
& Omaha Railroad company.
EIgin, Joliet e. Eastern Railroad
company.
Chicago, Peoria & st. Louis Rail-
road company of Illinois.
Chicago, Milwaukee & Gary
Railway company.
Minneapolis, st. Paul & SauIt
Ste. Marie Railroad company.
Washington, D. G. = The govern.
ment came to the aid of the manufac.
turers, shippers and consumers in
Western trunk line territory who Mon.
day filed a memorial with the depart.
ment of justice asking that the rail.
roads be restrained on the plea that
they were unjust, from putting into
effect a proposed increase of rates
by the Western Traffic asso-
citation. 1t also was contended that
the increases were the result of an
agreement between the railroads con.
trary to law.
The representations made by the
Omaha committee created favorable
on the mind of Attorney
Wickersham and after confer
ring with the president he decided that
United States District Judge Dyer at
Mo-, be asked to issue re-
order, which was granted by
him.
The intimation was given that the
administration was determined to con.
tinue the fight on behalf of the manu-
facturers and shippers had the appli-
cation for restraining order been
denied. This, it is understood, was to
have been undertaken under the gen.
eral provision of the Sherman anti
trust law alleging combination in
restrain Of trade. Necessarily this
would have opened the door to pro-
longed litigation which would have
been met by resort of the expedien-
tary act of congress. This law per-
mits of the advance of cases of this
character for a hearing befoer the
United States circuit judges.
1t was also pointed out that ship
pers have recourse under the Hepburn
law giving the right to individual ship
pers to institute proceedings for alleg-
ed unjust treatment in the matter of
rates.
The filing Of the bill followed a day
of hurried conferences between Presi-
dent Taft and the attorney general
and the matter, it is understood, was
gone into at some length at the cabi-
net meeting. The result reached was
that action be instituted at once, as
the rates complained of had not the
restraining order been granted, would
have gone into effect. In the senate,
also, the question came up incidental
ly when Senator La Toilette introduced
a resolution declaring it to be the
sense of that body that an Injunction
should be asked for.