Cut Bank pioneer press. [volume] (Cut Bank, Mont.) 1909-current, 1913-06-20

of suits by stockholders of the North
ern Pacific, the Great Northern and
the Minneapolis & st. Louis railroads
against the companies to enjoin them
from obeying the maximum freight
and 2-cent passenger laws as uncon-
stitutional, and against the state Of
1cials, to enjoin them from enforcing
the laws. Judge Sanborn, of the
United States circuit court, held the
laws unconstitutional, of a confisca-
tory nature, and that they burdened
interstate commerce. The three suits
were appealed to the supreme court.
The contest over the interstate COM
merce feature of the controversy was
similar to that in the Missouri cases.
In the Oregon cases it was contend
ed that there was an interference with
Interstate commerce. The Oregon
Railroad & Navigation company al
legged that the state railroad commits
sion, in reducing the state freight
rates from Portland to eastern oregon
cities, affected a reduction of inter-
state rates to those cities, because the
state rates were used as a basis for
the interstate rates. A similar claim
was made by the Southern Pacific
company as to rates along its line.
The United States circuit court for
Oregon upheld the rates. An attack
was also made upon the constitution
ality of the law creating the Oregon
railroad commission. That, too, was
upheld by the lower court.
The court, in concluding it's sum-
mary, after pointing out the general
authority of the national government
over Interstate commerce, concludes
there remains to the states the exer-
else of the power appropriate to their
territorial jurisdiction in making suit
able provision for local needs. The
state may provide local improvements.
create and regulate local facilities,
and adopt protective measures of a
reasonable character in the interest
of the health, safety and moral well
fare of it's people, although interstate
commerce may incidentally or indi-
rectly be involved. Where matters
falling within the state power, as
above described. are also by reason
of their relation to interstate com
merce within the reach of the federal
power, congress must be the judge of
the necessity of federal action and un-
| less nOnQrnC0 qRtc tho ctofn rnoxy nor
The paramount authority of congress
enables it to intervene at it's discre-
ton for the complete and efficient
government of that which has been
committed to it's care and for this pur-
pose and to this extent in
to a conviction of national need to
displace local laws by substituting
laws of its own.
While the decision apparently es-
tablishes the right of the states to
establish regulations covering inter
state business for common carriers,
even though engaged. in interstate
commerce, the sovereignty of congress
is clearly emphasized, leaving the sit
oNSAD OPOh " IAO multiplicity VI
complications such as have featured
conditions for several years, with dis
advantageous results. 1t is probable
that the developments will be fol-
lowed by more definite action on the
part OF the national government which
will establish a more definite line of
demarcation, and at the same time
accord a larger degree of uniformity
in the making of rates, a condition
that will do much to clear up the ex-
listing situation, which, at its best, is
unsatisfactory, with a tendency to-
wards ~retarding development through
additional railway construction.
Another Case Decided.
MISREPRESENTATION varying a dot
from the principles laid down in the
Minnesota rate cases the supreme
court of the United States upheld Mon
day state railroad legislation in Mis-
souri,, Arkansas, Oregon and West Vir-
ginia. This legislation included 2-cent
passenger laws in Missouri, Arkansas
and West Virginia.; maximum freight
rate laws in Missouri and Arkansas.
and freight rates out of Portland in the
Oregon cases. The only exception to
the sweeping approval of state stat
utes was in the case of several weak
er roads in Missouri.
The Oregon rate cases consisted of
two suits brought by the Oregon Rail-
road & Navigation company and the
Southern Pacific company.
That by the Oregon Railroad &
Navigation company was brought to
restrain the enforcement of an order
of the railroad commission of Oregon
made April %, 1908, prescribing
freight rates. The principal ground of
attack was that the order and rates
named would be an unconstitutional
l. intnrfnronoo with iptare4o+o oonoY,oroo