Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-10-31
MAY SHOW ATTITUDE
Bearing on Minnesota Rate
Case of Yesterdays Decision.
BELIEF AMONG LAWYERS
Effect Of Ruling on the Safety Ap-
pliance Act.
FEDERAL POWER IN A STATE
Important Legal Proposition Soon to
Come Before the Su-
preme Court

In legal and official circles here the be-
lief is expressed that the United States
Supreme Courts attitude toward the vast
ly important Minnesota rate case" soon
to come to hearing. may have been fore
casted in yesterdays decision upholding
the validity of the safety appliance act
over intrastate as well as interstate traf-
fic.
At any rate, it is thought the Supreme
Court will sustain Judge Sanborn in
taking jurisdiction over the case. and,
after all, that is a very essential feature
and the one which the governors conven-
ton resolved to contest, and appointed
Gov. Judson Harmon as it's counsel.
The effect of yesterdays decision was
to tighten the jurisdiction of federal law
over lntrastate tlaffic, and it was plein
that the Supreme Court is unwilling TO
permit fine distinctions to be dl ~wn 50
as to disSociate intraState and interstate
transportation.
Important Legal Proposition.
The Minnesota rate case is regarded
Of the most important legal PROPOSE
tions which has come before the court
in recent years. The Importance of
by the determination Of the Depart
ment of Justice. the governors of the
various states and the railroad com
missions OF several states TO Join with
the state of Minnesota in prosecuting
the appeal of the latter from the de-
cision of the court of appeals in the
Minnesota district.
Two of the most important issues
involved in this suit are the rights of
the federal courts to interfere with
state railroad commissions in their
regulation of an intrastate rate which
is directly involved with an interstate
rate, and, secondly, the federal courts
having assumed jurisdiction. the fixing
of an equitable basis of liabilities and
fixed charges and profits against w--.ch
the railroads may charge freight and
passenger rates. Some lawyers here
profess today to have formed an m
preston from the decision of the cour,
yesterday that the supreme authority
of the federal interstate commerce
commission in the matter of fixing
rates such as are involved in the Mum
case will be upheld by the court.
Argument on Safety Appliances.
The argument in the safety appliance
case was to the effect that single car
or even an entire train might readily
contain mixed shipments both in inter
SIdIC dHu Hill do dlC CoUlIIlcICe, anu uO
discrimination could therefore be en-
tertained by the court The lawyers
say that this argument applied in the
matter of safety appliances may logi-
cally be extended to the matter of
rates.
Should the court uphold the decision
of the circuit court in the Minnesota
district SO far as to give the federal
authorities supreme power over the
state commissions in fixing rates, the
lawyers today agree that the basis for
the fixing of reasonable rate as laid
down by the circuit court in Minnesota
may not be accepted by the Supreme
Court
The issue in this phase of the case prac-
tically comes back to the question of the
physica, valuation of the railroads. One
| of the main contentious of the state COM
missions is that in this valuation the rail-
roads shall not be permitted to include
the unearned increment of their terminal
facilities in large cities and towns in the
aggregate of liabilities and fixed charges
which the revenue from freight and pas
senger rates shall be called upon to meet.
In other words, in the Judgment of at
torneys familiar with interstate COM
merce law. if the Supreme Court upholds
the Jurisdiction of the federal authori-
ties in the Minnesota case it will be called
upon to lay down a uniform practice for
rate making.