The silver state. [volume] (Winnemucca, Nev.) 1909-1925, 1914-10-17
IMPORTANT CASES
in SUPREME court

affect virtually every man, woman
and child in the United States, have
been begun before the United States
Supreme Court. As an illustration,
every owner of railroad stocks or
bonds in the country, and every per-
son interested in state taxation ques-
tions, and every person who pays to
ride on trains, is interested in the
case of the Norfolk and Western Rail-
road company against the state Of
West Virginia This is one Of the
| cases set for early argument by the
Supreme Court, and is the first in the
| list.
| While barking back to the question
of confiscatory rates, the argument in
this case rests on the point whether
any rate can be confscatory, unless
the entire rate system of which il is
a part is confiscatory, Assuming the
contention of the railroad attorneys
that the two cent fare law results in
the company not receiving enough
revenue from its intra-state passenger
traffic to yield profit to be cor
rect, and this is virtually conceded by
the attorneys for the state, the ques-
tion is put up to the courts. Is that
sufficient to declare the rate confsca-
| tory?
| The state of West Virginia holds
that it is not. The state contends that
all of the business of the Norfolk and
Western within the state of West vir-
ginia is profitable and that it is be-
side the point to pick out the passen-
ger traffic, and say that this particu-
lar line of businesses does not pay. In
cidentally, the figures of the states
experts, as produced in the lower
courts, show that the revenue from the
2-eent tickets gives the company just
about operating expenses so that
clear case is established, as this would
yield no return on the investment.
The company's experts figure that it
does not even pay them to haul the
bl siness at the twocent rate, but that
| it is not the question which it put up
to the Supreme Court
This question is made of more in
teest because of the recent i've per
&C Mt rate decision of the Interstate
Commerce Commission, which suggest
ed to the railroads, in denying the
full measure of increases in freight
re les asked for, to raise their passen-
ger rates, as many of them were un-
profitable
Another case set for early argu-
ment of great interest to railroad men
is that of the Pullman company ver-
sus w. v. Knott, as comptroller OF
the state of Florida. This case con-
Gems the validity of the state act
taxing the gross earnings of all sleep
ing and dining cars within the limits
OF the state one and one-half per
liz ense taxes.
Argument on the so-called "Book
IT,pst,, case will also be begun at
once. This is the case of /. and U.
st aus Or. H. Macy & Coz, against
1.-The American Publishers association.
Because Macy & Co. refused to agree
to maintain a fixed retail price Tor
copyrighted books sold to it by mem
bers of the association, it is charged,
that all it's members refused to sell
their books and publications. to the de-
pa rtment store, causing it loss or
$125 900. The suit is under the anti
trust law, and is to recover treble
damages.
Title to valuable oil lands in Cali
fornia hangs on the arguments in the
case of Antonio Maria Peralta and
others against the state of California.
In patents issued prior to 1877, it is
alleged, fraudulent surveys were in
serted. The title to this enormously
valuable land dates back to an origin
al grant by the governor of Alta to
Luis Peralta, in 1920.
A most interesting case to the
white people of the south set for ear
Iv argument, is that of Carl Oliver,
against the state Of Texas. Oliver .
a negro, and was indicted for the
murder of Robert D. Stanley in June,
1910. Since then the case has been
dragging its way through the courts.
The question which will be put up to
the Supreme Court for decision, how
ever, is the fact that all negroes were
excluded from the grand jury, and
only white men were permitted to
serve.
The effectiveness of the meat in
spection act is though by government
officials to hang upon the decision OF
the case of the United States versus
Charles Lewis. Lewis Howard, Fred
Williams and James McBee. These
men were charged with violation of
!, the meat inspection law by destroying
government seals on freight ears con-
! tanning meat and meat products. Their
: guilt is not the question which is put
} up to the Supreme Court, but whether
. the law exempted persons other than
; those "engeged in the business of
T preparing meats for transportation
: or in s'carrying or assisting in the
e carrying of such meats in interstate
a transportation hTe government con-
n ce les that these men cannot be con-
vi ted if it is held that these two
cls sses are alone affected by the law.
g A somewhat similar question will
n be argued before the Supreme Court
is the case of the United States yer
d sus William c. Nixon, w. b. Biddls
II ami Thomas III. West, receivers fol
the st. Louis and San Francisco Rail
road company. The receivers wer,
d indicted for failure to placard thei