The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1913-03-26


the. fact that the appropriations for
its salary will continue 1t only until
June 30 Of this year. The court is
making good use OF what time remains
to II In the service of special privi-
lege
The prohibition OF pipe line monop-
oily was part OF the legislation enacted
by congress. June 90. 1906. when "
was declared that pipe lines used in
interstate commerce should no longer
be the instruments OF monopoly ana
that a company must share the use or
an Interstate pipe line on reasonable
service charges with other competing
concerns or they would not be per-
mitted TO maintain the lines.
II Is well known, and was brought
out in the extensive inquiry into the
Standard OILS affairs, that the pipe
line Is the foundation OF the Stand
ards monopoly. Even with their rail-
road rebates, and the extensive power
10 secure favorable terms and service
from railways, they would not have
been able to build up their country
wide monopoly had It not been for the
use OF the interstate pipe line. For
this reason congress declared that
pipe lines should be in fact common
. carriers, subject 10 proper regulation
and open to the use Of competitors.
II has taken seven years to bring
this case to a decision even before the
commerce court. This Is not surpris-
ing in view OF the array Of lawyers
employed by the Standard Oil Co. In
fighting the law. On the 18th of March.
however, the commerce court finally
rendered this important decision.
Judge Knapp. in voicing the majority
decision, says that congress has not
power to take the property In pipe
lines away from those who own them.
He inyokes that section OF the consul
tuition providing that property may not
be taken without due process or law.
Judge Knapp says that II man can
AFFORD TO own a pipe line. that Is 10
his advantage and to the disadvantage
OF the other man and the other man
Ia unfortunate. but congress cannot put
him on even terms with the man who
owns the pipe line. He says: IL
seems to MS TOO plain for argument
that these private pipe lines cannot be
leptslated into public facilities ana
that the amendment necessarily de-
prjyes the owners OF such lines OF
their property rights without just COM
pensation"
Judge Mack, in his dissenting opin'
ion. saws that II II is conceded that
congress has authority TO regulate IN
terstate commerce, il can regulate
such instruments az pipe lines which
are the means OF interstate commerce.
He saws the power OF congress may
he used ito remove restraints or OBJ
structions to conserving the public
health or morals or to promote the
general welfare. and the means TO be
adopted for the accomplishment Oh
these legitimate purposes rests in the
sound discretion OF congress-.
In the case of this particular iegis-
lation, he says: THE general purpose
ia 10 regulate interstate commerce in
oil. the immediate specific object Is To
remove a serious obstruction to the
free play OF competitive forces In the
Industry, to prevent monopolizatloh
~ part of such commerce. He says
that Ali this congress has the power
m do and intended TO do In the legis-
,ation which the commerce court has
declared 70 be unconstitutional.
The interstate commerce commits
s,on has reported the decision TO the
denartment OF Justice. and Atty. Zen.
NcRevnolds says that he will take
stens tn expedite the hearing and finai
decision by the United States supreme
carrf