Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1922-12-08
ORDER
HALTS FIGHT
FOR NEW JOB
Continued from page ~

ma. . So
w. Mcdonnell of the board concerning
the appointment.
The name of Thomas Hennessy,. OF
Bottineau 4county, former Sheriff, was
injected as a compromise candidate at
the last minute, and was understood to
have been proposed by Lemke and
favor or John N, HaganJ suggested aa
a compromise appointee.
Enforcement of the state grain
grading act passed as an initiated law
at the state election November 7. is
held up by an order issued Thursday
by Federal Judge Andrew Miller or
petition Of approximately IS plain
|tifs. mostly farmers elevator COM
panies. and several Minnesota COM
panies as well.
H. A. Libby Of Grand Forks, and
D. Simpson of the firm Of Lam
caster. Simpson, Junell, and Dorsey
Of Minneapolis are the attorneys for
the petitioners. (
Defendants in the case against
whom the injunction order is directed
are the members, of the state railway
commission, the attorney general, and
der they are directed to appear in
the federal court at Fargo on De-
cember 16 to show cause, II any there
be, why q permanent injunction
against the enforcement Of the act
should not be issued in federal court.
Papers i'll the action were being
|served on a number Of the defendants
at Bismarck Thursday night, accord
Ing to word received here.
Enforcement Restrained.
Judge Miller's order restraints the
railroad 1oWmission which under the
terms of the initiated law would have
direct charge Of the machinery for
its enforcement from complying with
its terms IN any, way.
The petitioners contend that the in
itiated grain grading act. the enforce
ment Of whichfthey seek to prevent,
is similar to the 1919 grain grading
law which was declared unconstitu-
tional by the United States supreme
court, in that it, like the 1919 statute
interferes with, and places a direct
burden upon interstate commerce,
and in the same manner as the form<
er act conflicts with the United States
grain standards law.
Compared to Former Act. =.
: They also contend that the present
act. like the former one, violates the
constitution of the United States and
also that Of the state Of North Da-
kota..
The petitioners then DECLARE that
unless restrained from so doing the
railway commission of the state, Will
son as supervisor of weights and
measures who in turn will carry out
the provisions Of the law. This the
petitioners declare will cause irre-
parable injury to them and their
property, and that the plaintiffs have
no plain, speedy, or adequate law in
fthe premises.
Therefore the petitioners pray that
the board Of railway commissioners
restrained from carrying out the pro-
visions of the grain grading act, and
that the force and effect Of the act
be suspended, and its enforcement
against the plaintiffs enjoined until
the fna1 determination OF the case.
Many Companies Concer1ied.
The plaintiffs include: The Farm
ers' Grain Co., Of Embden; The
Farmers Elevator Co. Of Wimbledon;
Gtandin Farmers Grain Co.; The
Hampden Farmers' Elevator Co.; The
Walhalla Cooperative Elevator; The
Glenfield Cooperative a~ssociatioh; The
Benedict, Cooperative. FarinerS Eles
Vator Co.; The Farmers Elevator and
Metcantile CO., Of Rogers; The /. L.
Berg Elevator; The kensal Farmers
Elevator CO., ana Winner Farmers
Grain Co., and number Of others. Z
The law objected to provide for the
inspection Of grain by the state de-
paftment: grading on the basis OF
United States grades: giving the. sup
ervisor power to fix margins OF prom,
and otherwise regulates the weighing,
grading and INSPECTION Of grain. and
licensing Of the elevators Of the state,