Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1914-01-03
Established Tariff Unanimous
" Declared Not to Be
ConfisCatOfy
Shipments Over Two Llaes
Are Assessed as One
Long bauI
Ruling Applies to All Coal
But Especially Covers
Ignite
Case Has Been in Litiga-
tion Almost Continuously
for Six Years

Late last evening the opinion of the
supreme court in the famous Lignite
coal rate cases was filed. the
EGpaft in a unanimous opinion written
by Justice Goss, upholding the con.
stitutionality of the. Ignite coal rate
law as not confiscatory Of the pro-
perty OF the railroad.
In brief the history Of the case is
that the 1907 legislature passed q
tariff to govern the hauling of ignite
coal within this state and prescribing
the maximum rates chargeable and
that when a shipment is over two
different roads it shall be charged
for as one long haul instead of at
the rate of two short hauls and great.
ly reducing the then coal freight rates.
1t governed all domestic coal ship.
ments but in effect it was particularly
applicable to Ignite. -
The railroads refused to change their
existing rates in 1907 to meet the sta.
tutory requirements and the attorney
general, McCue, began an original in
functional proceeding in the supreme
court to inforce compliance. The SIT
preme court then sustained the rate
and ordered the companies to obey the
1907 law. .TheW appealed to the
United States supreme court, claiming
they were being forced to carry lig-
mite at a loss. And in effect that their
property was therefore being confis-
Gated the federal supreme court con.
affirmed the state supreme
court but gave the railroads the right
to again apply for relief after they
had actually operated under the rate
law.
The statutory rates were then made
effective and after fifteen months In
force the railroads again submit proof
to the supreme court of collections and
costs of carriage of Ignite and urge
the invaldity Of the rate law as being
too low to allow them reasonable
and confiscatory of their
property. ~. ....
Much testimony of expert character
was submitted, the book of exhibits
alone constituting about three hun
dred railroad tabulations. All this
fall the volumes of testimony offered
On both sides of the case, is received
in the lengthy eighty.page opinion Of
he court.
The findings are that as to the Great
Northern the rates return a reason.
lble net profit over cost of freightage
If Ignite. AS to the Northern Paci
ic but a trifle over the cost of car
'iage and it being as to it non-com.
AS to the 500 Line the
ate does not return within $1,000 to
$4,000 of the full cost of transporta.
ion Of that commodity, owing to the
)ro.rating feature of the statute Civ.
ng the long hand portion of freight
collections of large part of the lig.
lite traffic, beginning on the 500 to
he Northern Pacific and Great North.
rn lines. But the court holds that
nder the Minnesota, Arkansas, Mis-.
ouri and Oregon rate cases, recently
ecided by the United States supreme
ourt, this fact alone does not estab
ish the rate as confiscatory as to the
100 Line it not being shone that
uch loss reduces the general Gomes-
ic or stat earnings to so low point
hat they do not pay an adequate re.
urn on all its property, devoted to
reating such earnings.
1t would seem that the effort of the
Minnesota rate case, United States
upreme court decision, is to make 1t
CONTINUED on Page 81