Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1912-04-02
Brief Filed in United States
Supreme Court in Oppo-
sition to Finding in Mime
sofa Litigation. ....
CLAIM EVERY STATE
CAN REGULATE RATES
Supreme Judges are Called
Upon to See That the
Boundaries of the States
Remain Unchanged.

governors of the states as a body to-
day filed their solemn protest with the
supreme court of the United States
against the proposition to strike down
state railroad rates as interfering with
interstate commerce. They respect
fully called upon the bench, having in
especial charge the covenant Of the
union" to see that the boundaries Of
the states remain. 1t was the first time
in the history Of the nation that such
a protest had been made.
The protest took the nature Of a
brief, filed as friends of the court"
by committee OF governors, Judson
Harmon of Ohio, Herbert s. Hadley of
Missouri, and Charles H. Aldrich OF
Nebraska. This committee was select
ed at conference of governors last
September. The brief was submitted in
connection with the "state rate cases, "
set for oral argument today.
The brief was of peculiar interest
coming SO soon after the most recent
decision of the interstate commerce
commission that railroads submitting
to low state rates, must give similar
rates on interstate business. 8
Based on Minnesota cAss. s--4
Because the federal circuit court in
the Minnesota freight and passenger
rate cases held the rates invalid not
only as confiscatory but by reason OF
their effect on Interstate commerce,
that case was taken as the text for
the governors protest. It was declared
that what was said went directly to
the right of every state to regulate
state commerce, and was designed par,
ticularly to be applicable to the Min.
nesota, Missouri, Oregon, Kentucky
Ohio, Arkansas and West Virginia
rate cases before the court. The gov
ernors had nothing to say about tne
confiscatory nature Of the rates, but
confined themselves to the interstate
phase of the question.
The committee of governors sci
forth the claim that because Mime
sofa had required the railroads to re
duce their rates from such cities az
St. Paul, Mimi, to Duluth. Mimi, on
the state boundary the interstate bust
ness of the railroads from st. Paul tc
Superior, Wis, just across the line
from Duluth, had been affected. Simf
lar conditions,S VT was stated, were te
be found in Kansas City, Kan, and
Kansas City, Mo-, East st. Louis, Ill.
and st. Louis, Mo-, Omaha, Neb., and
Council Bluffs, Iowa, Cincinnati, O..
and Covington and Newport, KY. The
vice Of the Minnesota decision, it was
urged, was not in an incorrect state
ment Of Minnesota geography but II
the plain disregard of the provisions
| CT the federal constitution, which es
! tablished the relation Of the natior
and the states by giving one contro
over interstate matters and the Other
control over state affairs. It was ad
mitted that there might be some ef
feet on interstate commerce wher
states regulate state rates. but 1t wat
asserted time and again in the brie1
that if railroad enjoys reasonable
return under state rates, 1t enjoys
every right to which it Is entitled.
! Would Uphold Dual Government.
"The test cannot be-" declared tht
governors, whether the effect of fix
ing the local rates may or will be tt
lead the railroads to lower their in
terstate rates, but whether the loca
rates are fair and reasonable, for i
they are 50 and the sum Of them is 81
much lower than the Interstate rate:
as to lead shippers to take the trouble
and risk of rebilling or reshipping a
state lines, this Is perfectly Lawful
Econdition the advantage of which th'
public is entitled to enjoy. And as thu
cost and convenience Of carriage IL
that way can be no less, but, as is vel
known, would rather be greater, thu
advantage would remain with tn
through rate even If it were reduced
so as to equal the sum of the loca
rates. The railroads cannot invoke th'
commerce clause of the federal con
stitution to shield themselves agains
fair and reasonable rates fixed by ,