The Winslow mail., 1911-02-25
NEW PRINCIPLES RELATING TO
INTERSTATE COMMERCE
ESTABLISHED.
SEVERAL CASES PASSED
NO DECISION RENDERED IN THE
STANDARD OIL DISSoLU-
TION SUIT.


many far-reaching principles relating
to interstate commerce been approved
by the Supreme Court of the United
States as were established in it's de.
cisions as the unquestioned law of the
land.
Decisions on several other difficult
questions also were announced.
Among the questions of interstate
commerce decided were:
That the passenger has no right to
buy tickets with services, advertising,
releases, or property; nor can the rail
road company buy services, advertis-
ing, releases or property with transpor-
tation.
A contract between the Monon Route
and the Frank A Munsey Company
gave rise to the principal case.
By the contract the MonOn Route
was to get one page of advertising in
Munsey's Magazine in exchange for
$500 worth of transportation.
The government claimed that this
was in violation of the Hepburn rate
law. 1t contended that if advertising
could be accepted, railroads could also
accept coal, or iron, or wood, or oil-or
anything else in payment for transpor
tation, thus opening the door to
wholesale determinations among the
shippers.
"The statute manifestly MEANS
said Justice Harlan, "that the purchase
of a transportation ticket by pas
senger and it's sale by the company
shall be consummated only by the
former paying cash and the latter re-
ceiving cash of the amount specified
in the published tariffs"
He said that the purpose of Con-
gress, in passing the law, was to "cut
up by the roots" every form of dis
elimination, favoritism and inequality
except in the case of certain ex-
cepted classes. In these excepted
classes, he said, Congress had not
placed those persons who had con-
tracts entered into with the railroads
before the passage Of the Hepburn
law for the issuance of passes.
The Supreme Court also decided
that railroads cannot issue passes for
interstate transportation even though
they had contracts to do so before the
passage of the Hepburn rate law.
The court decided as constitutional
an Iowa statute providing that no
contract of relief benefit or insur-
ance should bar the right of a rail
road employe engaged in the opera
tion of a railroad to sue the employer
for damages resulting from injuries
received in the course of his employ
ment.
The constitutionality of the law was
attacked when Charles L. Mcclure
sued the Chicago, Burlington &
Quincy Railroad Company for $4,000
damages for injuries. Mcclure had
been given 1882 by the Burlington Re
lief Department, an association main
tanned by the railroad and it's en-
ployes The company first contended
that the recovery from the relief fund
was bar to the action in court.
That state law regulating the size
of crews on trains within the state is
not an obstruction to interstate com
merce, but is rather enacted in aid of
interstate commerce and may be
passed by a state for the public /
safety.
The "full crew" act of Arkansas |
was held to be constitutional The |
''full crew" act provided for an engi- |
neer, fireman, conductor and three |
brakemen, on all railroads in the (
CT in 1oo OF troi
of more than twenty-five cars.
The state brought action to recover |
the penalties provided for in the stat
ute.
Persons who decided their land, sit
uated within a forest reservation to
the government with the expectation
of getting in lieu thereof public lands,
but who did not file on their proposed |
new lands until the repeal in 1905 of
the forest reserve lieu land law were
left holding the bag" in the opinion
of the Supreme Court.
No decision was rendered in either
the Standard Oil dissolution suit, the
Tobacco corporation dissolution suit,
the corporation tax cases, nor the
American Federation of Labor con-
tempt cases.
A rehearsing in the case involving
the constitutionality of the Oklahoma
hank guaranty law of 1907 was de-
ried. The court recently held that
the law was constitutional.