The Birmingham age-herald., 1921-10-25
NEW ARGUMENT IN
 WISCONSIN RATE
 CASE IS ORDERED
Case involving Constitution aIity of Transportation Act to Come Up Again
 December 5
By Associated Press

Washington, October 2l'--The su- preme court today ordered the rear gument of the Wisconsin rail rate case December 3. This case involves .constitutionality of the transporta- ton act of 1920.
 Authority of the interstate com merce commission to supervise purely intra-state transportation rates prob ably will not be finally determined before the new year, as result of the supreme court today ordering rear gument of the Wisconsin rate case, involving thls disputed point The case was ordered docketed for reargument on December and there have been few instances In which the court handed down a decision in a major case in less than a month after it was argued.
 Brought originally by the state of Wisconsin to test tho validity of an order of tho commission providing for increased rates between points entirely within the state. the case was immediately broadeped by the entrance of about 40 states either through their legal departments or transit commissions in opposition to the stand of the federal agency. The commission on It's part asserted that It's powers 1t attempted to assert were clearly included in tho trans portRtion act or otherwise it's super vision of interstate schedules would be meaningless.
 The court also announced that it would heard on January the state railroad case brought by North Da- kota- The New York case, involving the authority of interstate commerce commission over state charter roads was argued last week. and 1t is ex- pected the case brought from Texas will be heard within the next few months.
 More Time Granted
 The supreme court granted the gov ernment an extension of time. until November 29, to take testimony In tho case of the state of Oklahoma against Texas, involving tho Red river boundary.
 Persons paying federal taxes under protest cannot bring proceedings to recover such taxes against a success sor of the collector to whom the taxes were paid, the supreme court held today In deciding case brought by the Indiana Steel company. The supreme court refused to review tho conviction under Minnesota laws of A. c. Townley. president of the NOnparLiSldD DedBuet anu Joseph Gill; bert, manager of its organization de- partment.
 The court declined to consider an appeal brought by Hector H. Elwell, city editor of a Chicago newspaper. convicted of contempt of court for refusing to identify for a federal grand Jury the person who wrote a certain article printed in his newspa- per Elwell appealed on the ground that he could not be compelled to give testimony which might incrim- | incate himself.
 The supreme court refused to re- view the decision of the circuit court of appeals for tho Eighth circuit in- terpreting the cotton futures act in a proceeding brought by Silvan New burger and others of New Orleans, against Seth Gettys and others of l Oklahoma.
 ] The case originated in an effort by tho New Orleans parties as agents and brokers to recover money al- Ileged to have been advanced in the execution of orders from their Okla homa customers to buy and sell cot ton for future deliveries. The de- fense was based in part upon the {, contention that the transactions