The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1913-06-14
Supreme Court to Rule on
Railroad Question Monday.
Interest Centers on Cases APP
peaIed From Missouri.
"MORAL COURAGE" OF HUGHES
As Judge Must Rule on Own
Action When Governor.
His Veto Cited by Judge Whose
Ruling Is Appealed.

WASHINGTON, June Diminishing
touches to the supreme courts decis-
ion in the railroad rate cases from
Missouri, Arkansas, Kentucky, Oregon
and West Virginia are believed to have
been added today in secret conference
The decisions, with those in the other
40 cases before the court, are expected
to be announced Monday.
"NIoraI Courage Commented.
Justice Hughes is picked by most
lawyers familiar with the court pro-
cedure as certain to announce the con-
clusion of the court. as he did in the
Minnesota rate cases last Monday. In
doing so he will review the opinion of
Judge Smith Mcpherson, of the west
.ern Missouri circuit court. By strange
coincidence Judge Mcpherson in that
opinion commented upon Moral cour-
age" of Justice Hughes, then governor
of New York, for vetoing two-cent
passenger bill. Judge Mcpherson held
the Missouri maximum freight rate and
the two-cent passenger law conf1scated
the property of the railroads, and so
enjoined their enforcement.
The relations of a governor to pro-
posed legislation and those of court
to legislation consummated," held
Judge Mcpherson, ARE entirely differ
ent"
Mcpherson Ruling Not Upheld.
The apportionment of values and ex-
penses of the railroads on the revenue
basis, as done in the Missouri cases by
Judge Mcpherson, was disapproved in
the Minnesota cases. These errors,
Justice Hughes said, were not sufficient
to change a return of 3.5 per cent into
a remunerative rate.
May Make Distinction.
In the Missouri cases, Judge McPher-
son held that the return from the
freight rates would result in a deficit
on the Hannibal and the Burlington,
and a return not exceeding per cent
on the other six roads concerned. The
return from the 2-cent passenger law,
according to the judge would show
profit of from to per cent on the
and Hannibal. Kensas City, Clinton and
Springfield, and the Great Western; a
prOgt of from to per cent on the
st. Louis & San Francisco; and 3
per cent on the Santa Fe; a fraction
over per cent on the Kansas City
Southern and between and 4 per
cent on the Burlington. In view of that
finding many believe the supreme court
will first consider whether errors in
valuation and apportionment have been
sufficient in the Missouri cases to con-
vert a deficit or low return into
reasonable return. Many think the
certain roads and invalid as to 9TH
ers.
To Pass on New Points.
Several points not considered in the
Minnesota rate cases are expected to
be passed upon, either in the Missouri
or the Arkansas rate cases. Among
them is the question as to what re-
turn the roads are entitled on their
property.
In Missouri the court considered 9
per cent a reasonable return. In the
Arkansas cases, Judge Trieber. decIar-
ed the earnings should be 6 per cent
and in addition an allowance of IL
per cent should oe made as a surplus
for lean years. On that basis he held
the Arkansas maximum freight and 3
cent passenger law confiscatory, be-
cause he figured the st. Louis Iron
Mountain & Southern would make a
net earning of only q per cent and the
St. Louis Southwestern 26 per cent.