The Birmingham age-herald., 1913-06-17
Upholds State Railroad
Legislation in Four
States
MISSOURI LAWS
SINGLE EXCEPTION
Legislation Includes 2-Cent Passen-
ger Laws in Missouri, Arkansas
and West Virginia-The Ken
lucky Case Not Decided

Washington, June 16-Without vary
ing a dot from the principles laid down
last week In the Minnesota rate ease
the supreme court of the United states
upheld state y iIroad rate legislation
In Missouri. Arkansas. oregon and
West virginia.
This legislation included cent passen-
ger laws In Missouri. Arkansas and West
Virginia; maximum freight rate laws in
Missouri and Arkansas, and freight rates
only exception to the sweeping approval
of state statues was in the case of several
weaker roads in Missouri
The Kentucky case was not decided. 1t
involves an attack upon state rates from
river points to inland distillery cities, and
involves, in addition, mn attack on the
constitutionality of the form McChord act,
enabling the state railroad commission
TO fix reasonable rates on intrastate busi-
ness. A decision in this case may be
forthcoming when the court meets again
in October.
Justice Hughes announced the decision
in the rate cases today, as he did in the
Minnesota cases a week ago. Wherever
the point was raised that the state laws
interfered with Interstate commerce, the
justice referred 10 bis Minnesota rate de-
cision. lie disappointed any who believed
the court might in some way modify that
decision.
Need Not Review Arguments
We need not review the arguments ad-
dressed to conditions of transportation in
Missouri and the relation of intrastate to
interstate rates" he said, for while the
case has its special facts by reason OF
location of the state, and the use of the
Mississippi and Missour rivers as basing
point in rate making. the controlling ques-
ton thus pres sntcl with reference to the
authority of the state to prescribe rea-
sonable intras.ate rates throughout Its
territory, unless limited by the exercise 3a
tho part of Congcess of is constitutional
power over interstate commerce and its
Instruments, is MT to be disting uished ia
any material respect from that which was
considered and decided In the Minnesota
rate cases. -a
The Oregon aud West Virginia cases
were decided in favor of the states in
few words, the only point raised by the
railroads being that the laws interfered
with interstate commerce.
animation of claims in the Missouri and
Arkansas cases that the property of the
railroads devoted to intrastate business
would be confiscated.
AS result the state rates viii become
operative on the Chicago Burlington and
Quincy; the Atchlson, Topeka and Santa
fe, the Kansas City Southern, the Mis-
souri,, Kansas and Texas, the Chicago,
Rock Island and Pacific dncluding the ST.
Louis, Kansas City and Colorado), the st
Louis and San francisco, the ST. Louis
Southwestern, the Missouri Pacific, the
st. Louis. Iroa Mountain and Southern,
the Wabash, the Chicago, Milwaukee and
st. Paul and the Chicago and Alton.
Will Not Become Operative
For the present the rates viii not be-
come operative On the st. Louis and Han
nibal. the Kansas City, Clinton and
Springfield the Chicago Great Western,
the Quincy, Omaha and Kansas City, and
the st. Joseph and Grand Island
The court reflsu1 to accept the valua-
ton placed upon railroads in Missouri by
the states assessing board as basis FOR
fixing the fair value" for figuring
whether the rates confscated property
Justice Hughes took the case of the Bur
lington, and showed that by applying the
assessment value (mu1tipled three times
as was done by the federal court In Mis-
sourD to the whole system A system
result would be obtained In $155, 900 900
In excess of the capitalization of the sys-
TEN, besides, he said. there was nothing
to show upon what the assessors fixed
their valuation nor was it demonstrated
that the assessors avoided the mistakes
criticised in the Minnesota rate decision.
Manfestly a finding OF confiscation
could not be based on such valua-
tion in the absence of clear and convinc-
ing proof that the value actually existed
and that the different Items of property
were estimated respectively by correct
methods and in accord with proper
critera of value said Justice Hughes.
This proof was lacking In the case
of the other roads, although the special
considerations which have been mentioned
with respect 10 the Burlington property
may not be applicable, still we are left
in uncertainty as to the correctness of
specific valuations which have been
made"
Property AppOrtionment
Apportionment of property value be-
tween interstate and intrastate passenger
and freight traffic, according to gross
revenue was disapproved for reasons
stated In the Minnesota rate cases"
Coming to an apportionment of ex-
penses Justice Hughes said the plan
adopted by the lower court of applying
the revenue basis was open to the same
Continued Page TwOD