The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-06-23
-. S. TO CONTROL PIPE LINES.
Supreme Court Hoids That These
are Common Carriers.


Justice Mckenns uttered vigorous
d!ssent IN which he intimated that the
majority opinion OF the court verstd on
tn. theories of the socialists. The de-
cislon Is blow TO the Standard oil Com
lsny, a. u Is compelled 10 open up all Of
Its pipe lines TO competitors under rates
10 be regulated by he Interstate Com
merce Commission.
The opinion OF the court was read by
Justice Holmes VINO admitted from the
bench that the pipe line amendment to
the interstsie commerce act was undoubt-
eddy passed to meet IA s!tudtion created
BY the standard Oil companys monopo-
lizstion Of pipe line facilities
one Pipe Line Exempted.
The decision exernpts from the Jaw =
pip. line owned by the Uncle Sam OH
Company, which runs from the coinpa ny 1
oil well IN Oklahoma % lts refinery In
H. nsas
Chief Justice White dlssented 10 80
much Of the opinion as exempted the
I pipe line or the Uncle Sam Company and
Justice MCkenDa joined III this dissent.
| The decision viii not however. exemp,
the pipe Ines OF the Uncle Sam COMPANY
from regulation by the Interstate Com
merce Commission n that company should
enter tue Held as n purchase. uf oil for
transportation In interstate commerce.
Ihe pipe line decision has been look ID
forward 10 80 one Of the most interest.
Ing cases measuring the power of con.
gfs-s 10 regulate SOnmer,s. The case
| mas been under sdN!sement d long kline
and a strong dissent read by Justice Nc,
NehLa viii give some idea o. the strus,
se lnst went on Ia the conference room
over the issue Involved in this case
Justice Mckenna SAID II was of small
consequence what the effect OF the opin
lot would BE- on the Individual CORPORA
! tlon affected. bu, that Il was "of rrea
consequence whether the sanction Of prop
. ertN De impaired"
The Standard OF COMPANY and II,
subsidiaries which went iu,o the Com
inerc- Court and 20: an injunctio.
against the Interstate Commerce com
mission. enforcing - order regulatln.
me pipe lines. mad based the petition 10
az injunction on the ground tina, tn,
pipe line owners were being deprived
OF ths!r property without due process .
law.
Justice McKenna proceeded to discus
the rights OF private property and th
circumstances under which the Govern
ment may step in and declare publ,
us In II. The Justice said
The pulse of the pipe lines ia said =
he the control which the standard al
Company had acquired over pipe lin
transportation. bur the companies hay
no right OF eminent domain and th-i
pipes are laid over private rights of way
They have never held themselves out a
common carriers The conCt pt.on o
property Is exclusiveness-the rights o
exclusive possession. enjoyment and dis
position"
Justice McKenna suggested that unde
such a d, c!sion az that rendered to-day .
Washington business man who had pro
v.dsd exceptional facilities for the con
due. OF his business might be compelle,
10 share them with a competitor Ii
concluding Justice McKenna vlrtuali
criticised his associates on the bench 10
adopting the theories OF the socialists
There Is quite a body OF opinion wh.c
considers the individual ownership OF prop
ertv economically and politically wronI
ana insists upon a common ownership q
all that Is profit bearing" said Justic
McKennA
This opinion has its cause among othe
causes Ia the power may I say the dures
of wealth. II Il acoumulates 81 pe
cent. o. power. may II put Its conviction
INTO law and justify the law by the sd
Vancement % the public welfare by de
siroying the monopoly and mastery q
separate ownership"