Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1911-11-01
COMPLETE CONTROL OF ROADS
Decision in Safety Appliance Act
Foreshadows This.
INTERSTATE BUSINESS TEST
Act Applies to All Equipment
ON Highway Of Inter
state Commerce.


WASHINGTON. oct st.-CompIete con-
troll Of the. railroads OF the country by
the Interstate Commerce commission and
virtual elimination OF the state commits
Eions from such control Is foreshadowed
In an opinion given yesterday by the
supreme court OF the United states. The
court held that hereafter ali locomotives.
cars or other equipment used on any rail-
road which is a highway OF interstate
commerce must comply with the federal
safety appliance act.
In its opinion the court held that COM
pliance. with federal law Is compulsory
on all railroads which are engaged iu the
transportation OF persons or freight from
one state to another. Celebrating this,
however. II held that tho cars or equip
ment Of such roads even n engaged IN
such transportation within the confines
OF state, must be considered as part
and parcel OF the road, and therefore
completely under the jurisdiction OF the
federal commission.
HuIInE Unanimoua.
Members OF the Interstate Commerce
commission. who have been embarrassed
on numerous occasions by clashes OF au-
thority with state commissions are jubi-
liant at the ruling OF the supreme court.
which was unanimous.
Referring to the courts opinion Com
missioner Franklin X Lane declared 1t
meant. eventually, that there is to be no
dual control OF Interstate carriers.
The determination OF this mooted ques-
ton was laid down In an opinion by JUS
tce Nandevanter IN a case Instituted by
the government against the Southern rail-
way. The point at Issue was whether tho
federal act applied in the case Of a ship
ment from one point In Alabama 20 an
other point In the same state, tho ship
ment being In an improperly equipped
car. The lower courts held that there
had been violation OF the law and their
judgment was sustained by the supreme
court
Uphold SAFETY Appliance Act.
Justice Vandevanter held that the law
applied TO all equipment on n highway
OF interstate commerce. whether at the
time II was carrying interstate or intra-
state commerce. He then held and was
sustained by the courts unanimous opIn-
ion that the safety appliance act was
constitutional.
Speaking only Of railroads which are
highways OF both interstate and lntra-
state commerce." says Justice Vande-
vanter, these things are OF common
knowledge-both classes OF traffic are at
times carried In the same car and when
this Is not the case tho cars in which
they are carried are frequently commin-
gied in the same train and in the switch
ing and other movements at terminals.
Cars are seldom set apart for exclusive
use In moving either class OF traffic, but
generally are used INTERCHANGEABLE in
moving both and the situation Is much
the same with trainmen, switchmen and
Ike employees, for they usually II not
necessarily have to do with both classes
OF traffic. Besides. the several trains on
the same railroad are not Independent in
point Of movement and safety. hut are
intertependent; for whatever brings delay
or disaster TO one, or results IN disabling
one OF Its operatives, IL calculated 10 Inn
pede the progress and imperil the safety
OF other trains. And 40 tho. absence OF
appropriate safety appliance from any
part OF any train is a menace not only
90 that train, but 10 others"
The decision of the court is generally
regarded as OF far-reaching Importance. II
will enable the commission TO enforce,
practically without question. It's orders
based upon that law.
Rate Cases Not Involved.
Those who casually examined the opln.
ion were divided as TO its bearing on the
litigation AS to whether a state may regu-
late freight and passenger rates on lntra-
state traffic when such regulation inter-
feres, or might interfere. with interstate
commerce. The supreme court Is 20 con-
slider the question next January when
Il hears the Minnesota and Kentucky
rate cases. II ID the best Judgment OF
those conversant with the situation, how
ever that today's decision has little II
any bearing upon the rate case.
More or less friction has arisen between
the Interstate Commerce commission and
various state railroad commissions, which
has rendered Il embarrassing to the fed
eral body In its work OF interstate regu-
iatioA. Upon this point Commissioner
Lane said:
The supreme court could say, and
beiieye II will say eventually. that an
intetaAte carrier cannot be controlled
by . state commission Ia any way that
would prefer intrastate over interstate
traffic, In other words the federal
authority cannot permit a state to build
wall around It's borders that would
afford the people within that wall a
greater advantage in commerce than 4.
enjoyed by the people OF another state
outside the wall We cannot have SEN
arated, ariculated arteries OF com
merce.
wants National Regulation.
We must have national system OF
railroads under national control and reg
uiation believe that finally the gov
ernment will determine. as the govern
ment Of Canada. for instance. determines
whether a proposed line OF railroad shall
be constructed. The building and opera.
ton Of new line OF railway may nut
out of business another line that "a
equipped 20 supply all the needs OF the
territory traversed. II is folly To con
struct the new line, because it's operation
means simply a division OF the traffic
between two lines. where one is amply
able 10 carry Il. and that IN turn means