The Birmingham age-herald., 1916-05-12
The Supreme Court Rules Against Railroads In
 Important Case
THREE ROADS ARE
 PARTIES IN CASE
Court Also Passes On Winston County Dedication Case-Other Im- portant Decisions Made
 Yesterday

Montgomery May 11.-(Special.) )-That railroad carriers can withdraw special or preferential rates at will, but cannot put new rates into effect except upon the approval of the public service commis- sion, is the substance of an opinion hand ed down by the supreme court today in the case of the state versus the Louisville and Nashville, the Alabama Great South ern and the Southern railroads. The preferential rates case was the most important out of list of more than 4C cases decided by the court today. The litigation. in the case was begun last fall. upon the filing by the carriers of tariffs discontinuing special or preferen- tial rates on coal and other commodities consigned to the Birmingham industrial district
 The commission, through Attorney Gen. eral William l.. Martin, at once applied to Chancellor W. R. Chapman of the southeastern chancery division for a pre-. hminary order preventing the carriers from putting the new rates into effect on the day specified in the new tariffs. The PA oioci WdS SldUlSu, ana appIl- cation was made to Chancellor w. w. Whiteside of the northeastern division for an injunction
 Chancellor Whiteside at first decided in favor of the railroads contention. but later modified his opinion and rendered s decree reinstating the injunction restrain Ing the carriers from cancelling the old special rates This portion of the deer ae was reversed by the court.
 In speaking of the autboritv oP +ba commission, the court said: Tt would. therefore, seem that the carrier can with draw said special rate at will but can not put the new rate into effect except upon the approval of the commission and after otherwise complying with the statute in question. While the commission ha s no right to voluntarily put special rates into effect, or to prevent the carrier from withdrawing same after being put into operation, it has the authority to revoke or discontinue said special rates with or without the action consent of the car rier."
 The opinion of the court was written by Chief Justice John C. Anderson
 DUPLICATION CASE
 The supreme court reversed and re- manded for new trial the TingIe case. appealed from. the Winston circuit court, in which the state, on behalf of Winston county, sued the sureties of former Tax Collector J. M. Tingle, an alleged de- faulter, for approximately S5000 for. taxes alleged to have been collected by him and not paid over to the county. The state was awarded a judgment for SIPS. 60 on March 13, 1915, not being given the full amount because of a certain credit of s365S allowed by the lower court for a payment made by Tingle to the county tpno on hoy ba tion was whether the credit should apply on the accounts of the collector for tha period at issue.
 Because the lower court refused to ad- init four charges requested by counsel for the defense, the supreme court granted a new trial to Morris Reynolds Arthur Glass and Hubbard Glass, who were convicted and sentenced to 30 years by the Bibb county circuit court for the murder of Scott Craddock.
 The following is the list of decisions handed down by the court:
 Anderson. c. J.-Alabama Great Southern Railroad company vs. Love man Compress company, appeal from Sumter circuit court; affirmed.
 Thomas L. Hackett vs. Will Cash, appeal from Montgomery city court; affirmed.
 Jehu c. Guin ct al vs Grasselli CneHllCdl COInpdHN- dpPcdl lfoIl l<dlidT circuit court; affirmed in part re- versed in part and remanded.
 The state eX rel. attorney general vs Louisville and Nashville Railroad company (and cross appeaD, appeals from Etowah chancery court af- firmed in part and in part reversed and rendered.
 vs Alabama Great Southern Railroad company (and cross appeaD, appeals from Etowah. chancery court; affirmed on direct appeal; on cross appeal a1- firmed in part and in part reversed and rendered.
 The state ex rel. attorney general vs Southern Railway company (and cross appeaD, appeals from 1ctowah chancery court; affirmed on direct ap peal: on cross appeal affirmed in part. and in part reversed and rendered.
 Mcclellan, J.-Tennessee Coal. Iron and Railroad company vs. Jesse Rutledge, ap- pea, from Birmingham city court; af- irmed.
 Walsh Manufacturing company vs. w. T.. Butler circuit court; affirmed, Mcclellan and Mayfield, J. J., dissenting in part.
 A. J. Langley ct al. vs. Mary Langley, appeal from Chambers probate court; re- versed and remanded.
 Mary L. Waddail vs. Robert Vassar ct al., appeal from Jefferson chancery court; reserved and remanded
 Central of Georgia Railway company vs. Walter H. Carlock, appeal from Bir- mingham city court; reversed and re- ma nded, Thomas. J., dissenting.
 Mrs. Samuella J. Miller vs. Mrs. Ella M. Graham, appeal from Jefferson circuit court: reversed and remanded.
 Annie O'Brien, administratrix, vs. Br- mingham Railway, Light and Power com pany,- appeal from Jefferson circuit court reversed and remanded.
 Birmingham Railway, Light and Power company vs. J. NJ. Sprague. appeal from Birmingham city court; affirmed.
 Alabama City. Gadsden and Attalla Railway ct mpany vs Leonie Bessiere, ad- miristratrix, appeal from Gadsden city court affirmed, Anderson. C. J.. and Sayre, J., dissenting.
 Lay appeal from Etowah chancery court affirmed
 D. K Caldwell ct al vs. G. B. and F. H. Caldwell .et al, appeal from Jackson charcery court reversed and remanded
 Sheffield National bank ct al. vs. Corirth Bank and Trust company. appeal from Colbert chancery court: affirmed.
 First National bank of Gadsden vs. Hugh C. Henderson. appeal from Marshall eircuit court. affirmed.
 Sayre J..Morris Reynolds. ct al. vs.