The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1913-06-17
RAILROADS LOSERS
| IN MANY DECISIONS
| IN SUPREME COURT
Out Of Fourteen Cases InvoIv-
ing Rates Only Three
Are Sustained
NEW PRINCIPLES
ARE NOT INVOLVED
Extensive Opinion Given Only
in Missouri Cases---C.
and O. Loses in
West Virginia

WASHINGTON, June is.--Follow-
snE the principles laid down by Jus
tice Hughes last Monday. in the
minnesota rate cases, the Supreme
court today disposed of fourteen other
separate rate cases. nearly ali of them
tn favor OF the States
The cases decided today involved
The actions of the State authorities in
nteeouri. Arkansas. Oregon and West
Virginia. In fixing two cent passenger
pr other rates. In only three of the
Fourteen separate cases disposed of
4oday we're the State made rates con-
Aemned as confiscafory. Counting the
minnesota cases decided last Monday
the rates fixed by the State commits
eicners. or State legislatures. in only
four cases out of a total OF seventeen
have been overruied on the ground
II being confiscatory,
No New Principles
Todays decisions laid down no new
principles, except in the additional
| light thrown on what the Supreme
court regards as the proper way OF
making physical valuations of rail-
road properties, AS 10 determination
OF the question OF power OF the in
terstate commerce commission over
intrastate rates. which unjustiy dis
eliminates against shippers outside
the State, that stili remains unsettled,
and apparently will not he passed on
now until the court decides the we'll
known Shreveport case
The only instance in which the
court gave an extended opinion today
was In the Missouri cases, eighteen
In number. In every case the power
Of the State to impose n rate between
points wholly within the State was
sustained by the court. except where
the rate was shown Ia be conffscatory.
In the lower court the state had been
cn3cined from enforcing freight rate
and passenger fare acts passed in
Iso7. In all these cases except three
the highest court reversed the judy
Tent OF the federal court in Mis-
souri,. which issued the iniunctions
The question OF Interference with
interstate commerce lis the same as
that presented in the Minnesota rate
cases, and the decision liz the same"
raid Justice Hughes. who announced
! the con customs Of the court today
SIX Out of Nine.
The Supreme court today sustain
ed the rates both passenger and
freight, prescribed by the State of
Missouri, as to six companies. and
these lower rates will go into effect
following the mandate OF the court
These are the Chicago, Burlington
and Quincy Atchison. Topeka and
Santa Fe, Kansas City Southern.
Missouri. Kansas and Texas Chicago.
Rock Island and Pacific (which in
Guided also the st. Louis Kansas City
and Coioradol. and the st. Louis and
San Francisco.
In three of the nine cases the STU
preme court found the lower court
vas right in adjudging the rates TO
De ccnfiscatory. and affirmed the de-
cree "a tn the three. These railroa ds
are the ST. Louis and Hannibal the
Kansas City. Clinton and Springfield
and the Chicago Great Western.
As to the six companies that en-
tered into stipulation In the court
below to abide the decision as to
other eases the lower rates will go
into effect These roads are the st.
louis Southwest Missouri Pacific,
81. Louis Iron Mountain and South
ern: Wabash. Chicago, Milwaukee
and SIT. Paul. and Chicago and Al
son.
Arkansas Also Wins.
Following the decision in the Mis-
souri, rate cases, Justice Hughes an
nounced tho courts conclusions In
the matter Of the Arkansas rate cases,
These suits were two in number,
brought by the st. Louis. Iron Noun
tain and Southern. and the st. Louis
Southwestern. to enjoin the enforce
ment of an Arkansas law In 1907,
hxYng a twn-cent fare. for passengers,
and The orders of ke State railway
commission prescribing maximum
freight and passenger rates
In the Arkansas cases. as In the
Z ,Nt HnI
rule Of the Missouri rate cases. and
held there was no interference by the
stAte with interstate commerce. ss'sfas9
Oregon Court Sustained.
In two cases involving an order
made by the railroad commission OF
Oregon. In 1908. prescribing freight
rates. the Oregon Railroad and Navi-
cation company. and the Southern
Pacific company. attacked the orders
IT the commission. as IAN unconstitu-
tional interference with Interstate
commerce.. ~
In these cases the court below sus-
famed a demurrer to the petition
aief on behalf Of the transportation
rompany, on the ground that there
waa no violation OF the. constitution.
M there were no allegations sum
r;art Ia raise a question 81 confisca-
tinn. The decree OF the lower court
In this case was afiirmed. on the au-
thority Of the Minnesota rate case
ana a. in the other cases the lower
s..s. will continue in force.
a. o. Loses In West Virginia.
n The West Virginia case, . two
,.rt passenger fare law was sus-
ts;ned against an attack by the ches-
apeakc and Ohio.
n IN deciding the case. Justice Hughes
-. ..The. questions presented are
~,,n.tantially tha-Hama aS-tnoss-reeA-
III - -.irued from First Page,)