« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
ment to apply in a summary way by petition to the district court of any judicial district in this state, in which the carrier complained of has its principal office or in which the violation or disobedience of such order or requirement shall happen, alleging such violation or disobedience, as the case may be; and such court shall by its order then fix a time and place for the trial of said cause, which shall not be less than twenty (20) nor more than forty (10) days from the time of said order fixing said time of trial; and it shall be the duty of the sheriff of the county in which such proceeding is pending to forth with serve a copy of said petition and of said order upon the common carrier complained of, and it shall be the duty of such person or common carrier to file his or its answer to said petition within ten (10) days after the service thereof, as aforesaid. Upon the trial of said cause the findings of fact of said commission as set forth in its report shall be prima facie evidence of the matters therein stated, and if either party, being entitled to a trial by jury, as in this act provided, shall demand a jury, or shall omit to waive a jury, the court shall by its order direct the sheriff to select, in the presence of the parties or their attorneys, from the number of persons qualified to serve as jurors in the county, thirty (30) such persons as he shall deem most indifferent between the parties, and the complainant or petitioner shall first strike off one of the names so selected, and the opposite party shall strike off one, until each have struck off eight (8). The sheriff shall then make a copy of the names of the remaining fifteen (15) persons and deliver the same to the clerk of said count, who shall thereupon issue and deliver to such sheriff a venire focias, with the names in said list contained, annexed thereto, and such sheriff shall summon the persons named according to the demand of such writ; and upon the trial of the cause the jury so selected shall be called as they stand upon their panel, and the first twelve (12) of them who shall appear and are not challenged for cause, or set aside by the court, shall be the jury, and shall be sworn to try the issues joined in said cause or proceedings; provided, that if a sufficient number do not appear for the trial of said cause the court shall cause talesmen to be called as in other cases. If the judgment of a district court shall be in favor of the party complaining, he or they shall be entitled to recover a reasonable counsel or attorney's fees, which shall be collected as part of the costs in the case.
For the purpose of this act, excepting its penal provisions, the district courts of this state shall be deemed to be always in session.
THE FARWELL FARMERS' WAREHOUSE ASSOCIATION VS. TIIE
MINNEAPOLIS, ST. PAUL & SAULT STE. MARIE RAILWAY COMPANY.
In our report for 1893 was published at length the opinion of the supreme court of this state affirming the decision of the district court of Hennepin county, which sustained the order of this commission in this important case. The order of the commission was also published in full in the report of 1893. On the 10th of November, 1893, the defendant corporation filed a petition for a writ of error to the supreme court of the United States. The petition was allowed and the writ issued. Before the case was reached in the supreme court of the United States, to wit, on the twelfth day of October, 1895, the following stipulation between the par: ties was signed and filed with the clerk of the court:
Supreme Court of the United States, October Term, 1895.-The Minneapolis,
St. Paul & Sault Ste Marie Railway Company, Plaintiff in Error, vs. The Farwell Farmers' Warehouse Association. In Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Minnesota.-Stipulation.
It is hereby stipulated and agreed between the parties to "he above entitled action, through their respective attorneys, by and with the consent of the State of Minnesota, acting through its attorney general, that all matters of difference between said parties are hereby compromised and settled as follows:
The said railway company shall give to the said warehouse association the privilege of moving its warehouse upon lot fifteen (15) of the station grounds of said company at Farwell, upon the same terms and conditions and with the same privileges as those now or hereafter enjoyed by the parties having elevators or grain warehouses on said station grounds, and to pay said association the sum of one thousand three hundred and fifty dollars ($1,350.00) in cash.
In consideration of the foregoing the said association agrees to accept said site for its warehouse and said sum of money in full satisfaction of the judgment heretofore obtained against said company, by which said company was required to build a side or spur track to said warehouse as now situated, and in full settlement of all claims and damages against said company, on account of the matters involved in litigation between said parties or otherwise, and hereby releases said company from any and all such claims and from all actions, or rights of action, growing out of, or appertaining to the matters now or heretofore in controversy between said parties.
It is mutually agreed that the appeal from the judgment rendered by the supreme court of Minnesota in said cause, now pending in the supreme court of the United States, shall be dismissed without costs to either party. Dated this 12th day of October, A. D. 1895. FARWELL FARMERS WAREHOUSE ASSOCIATION,
By Horace Austin, its Attorney. MINNEAPOLIS, ST. PAUL & SAULT STE. MARIE RAILWAY COMPANY
By Alfred H. Bright, its Attorney.
This finishes the record of this case. It settles the law upon a matter of great interest and importance to the people of this state.
The judgment of the supreme court of Minnesota vindicates the action of the commission and sustains the right of every person to equal and substantially similar facilities for the transportation of grain.
COMPARATIVE PRICES OF WHEAT IN DULUTH AND LIVERPOOL.
In the following report, or table of comparisons, extending over a period of about three years, we have endeavored to show the relative prices of wheat existing at the same time between Liverpool and Duluth, the basis No. 1 hard Duluth inspection being used in all cases not otherwise specified, and in those cases, notably 6, 7, 10, 11, 14, 25, and 28, the grade of No. 1 hard Manitoba was used, as upon the dates mentioned no Minnesota hard was sold or offered for sale.
and Freight), as Compared with Market Price of Same in Duluth on Day of such Sale, from Nov. 28, 1893, to Nov. 2, 1896, Compiled under Direction of the Railroad and Warehouse Commission.
DATE OF SALE REPORTED IN LIVERPOOL.
No. 1 Hard, on
Lake Freight, Du
luth to Buffalo.
Canal Freight, Buf
falo to New York.
Rail Freight, Du
luth to New York.
Ocean Freight New
York to London.
Duluth to London.
Sale Price Reported
Sale Price Reported
at New York, Aboard Ocean
Steamer for Exp't. Cost (Delivered)
Below Duluth Market that Day.
Above Duluth Market that Day.
13.80 13.80 13.80 15.00 15.00 15.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 21.00 15.00
02.60 03.10 04.15 06.35 04.80 07.06
Manitoba No. 1 Hard. Manitoba No. 1 Hard.
Cents. | Cents. 81.75 81.00 81.00 79.50 81.00 81.00 80 62 80.75 81.00 80.60 77.50 78.00 76.25 70.50 73.12
12.35 13.50 13.60 06.10 00.10
Manitoba No. 1 Hard. Manitoba No.1 Hard.
00.77 | Manitoba No. 1 Hard.
Cents. Cents. Cents.
1 November 28, 1893..
December 6, 1893.........
June 26, 1891.
July 24, 1891.
September 10, 1894....
November 13, 1894 ...
May 20, 1895.
02.60 01.85 03.97 02.35 01.83 03.60 02.80 03.43 02.05
00.42 00.05 01.18
32, July 4, 1896...... . .
July 31, 1895............
72.00 70.00 68,38 60.00 56.50 68.00 69.50 58.00 58.50 54.75 55.25 55.25 58.50 57.88 59.13 59.88 59.00 58.88 57.75 59.12 65.00 67.50 68.25 68.75 68.50 71.38 74.75
This report is made from actual sales reported by the “Liverpool Corn Trade News,” which is considered the leading journal of Great Britain in all matters pertaining to the grain trades of that country and of the world. The prices quoted at Duluth are taken from the “Commercial Record,” which is the official publication of the Duluth Board of Trade, and they can be relied upon as being correct. The figures given as freight by lake, canal and ocean were procured from reliable sources also. The matter of incidental charges is intended to include insurance, commission, elevator, and transfer charges, and also possible demurrage charges to canal boat or ocean steamer, and is also proximately correct.
In the cases of Nos. 2 to 12, inclusive, “all rail” rates from Duluth to New York are given, and clearly demonstrate the fact that grain transported "all rail” between those points cannot be disposed of at a profit to the exporter.
DECISION OF THE COMMISSION IN THE HANLEY FALLS CASE. Before the Railroad and Warehouse Commission of the State of Minnesota. John F. Jacobson, Complainant, against The Wisconsin, Minnesota & Pacific
Railroad Company and The Willmar & Sioux Falls Railway Company, Defendants.
The complaint of John F. Jacobson came on to be heard before the Rail. road & Warehouse Commission of the State of Minnesota, on Tuesday, Feb. 18, 1896, at Hanley Falls, Minn., all of the members of said board being present.
The Wisconsin, Minnesota & Pacific Railroad Company and the Willmar & Sioux Falls Railway Company each appeared by their attorney, W. F. Booth; George B. Edgerton appeared for the complainant, John F. Jacobson,
The following named witnesses were sworn and examined as witnesses in support of the allegrations of the complaint of the said John F. Jacobson:
S. Christopherson, Hanley Munson, Charles Brown, Martin E. Tew, John F. Jacobson, Henry Isaacson, F. A. Beltz, W. B. Thomason, and William Crooks. All of said witnesses having been called on part of complainant, the defendants offering no evidence.
After hearing the testimony of said witnesses we find the following facts to be admitted or proven:
That the lines of the two defendant railroad corporations intersect at Hanley Falls, in the State of Minnesota; that the Wisconsin, Minnesota & Pacific Railroad Company is now, and for a long time prior to the filing of the complaint herein has been, operated in connection with a line of railway extending to the cities of St. Paul, Minneapolis and Duluth, in the State of Minnesota, and to various markets and business centers in adjoiniag states.
That the Willmar & Sioux Falls Railway Company is likewise operated in connection with a line of railway extending to St. Paul, Minneapolis, and Duluth, in the State of Minnesota, and to Sioux City, Iowa, and various markets and business centers in adjoining states.
That the complainant, John F. Jacobson, is a citizen and resident of the county of Lac qui Parle and State of Minnesota, and is now and for a long time past has been engaged in the business of shipping grain, wood and other commodities on and over the lines of the Wisconsin, Minnesota & Pacific Railroad Company, in the State of Minnesota; that the said Wisconsin, Minnesota & Pacific Railroad Company is a corporation duly organized, created and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and has been for several