Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

sylvania Railroad Company et al. Discriminating rates on petroleum oil. United States circuit court, western district of Pennsylvania.

Interstate Commerce Commission v. Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway Company et al. Hampton long and short-haul case. United States Supreme Court.

Interstate Commerce Commission v. Southern Pacific Company et al. Kearney long and short-haul case. United States circuit court, northern district of California. Argued and submitted March 16 and 17, 1903.

Interstate Commerce Commission v. Southern Railway Company. Danville long and short-haul case. United States Supreme Court.

Interstate Commerce Commission v. Southern Pacific Company et al. California orange case.

United States circuit court, southern division of the southern district of California.

Interstate Commerce Commission v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Company et al. Hay case. United States circuit court, northern district of Ohio.

Interstate Commerce Commission v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company. Contempt proceedings against Milton H. Smith, president Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company; W. Hale, superintendent (fourth division) Seaboard Air Line Railway, and W. B. Denham, superintendent (second division) Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, for violating injunction decree. United States circuit court, southern district of Georgia.

United States v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, northern district of Illinois. United States v. Illinois Central Railroad Company. Proceeding to

v enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, northern district of Illinois.

United States v. Michigan Central Railroad Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, northern district of Illinois.

United States v. Pennsylvania Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, northern district of Illinois.

United States v. Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, northern district of Illinois.

United States v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, northern district of Illinois. United States v. Wabash Railroad Company. Proceeding to enjcin

H. Doc. 253 6

departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, western district of Missouri.

United States v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, western district of Missouri.

United States v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, western district of Missouri.

United States v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, western district of Missouri.

United States v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunc: con granted. United States circuit court, western district of Missouri.

United States v. Chicago & Alton Railroad Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, western district of Missouri.

United States v. Chicago Great Western Railway Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, western district of Missouri.

United States v. Missouri Pacific Railway Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, western district of Missouri.

United States v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company. Proceeding to enjoin departure from published tariff rates. Temporary injunction granted. United States circuit court, western district of Virginia.

United States v. J. E. Geddes, receiver Ohio River & Western Railroad Company. Action to recover penalty under section 6, safetyappliance act of March 2, 1893, as amended April 1, 1896. United States circuit court of appeals, sixth circuit.

United States, ex rel. Martin A. Knapp et al. v. Boston & Maine Railroad Company. Petition for mandamus to compel filing of annual report. United States circuit court, district of Massachusetts.

United States, ex rel. Martin A. Knapp et al. v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Company. Petition for mandamus to compel filing of annual report. United States circuit court, northern district of Ohio.

United States, ex rel. Martin A. Knapp et al. v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company. Petition for mandamus to compel filing of annual report. United States circuit court, southern district of New York.

United States, ex rel. Martin A. Knapp et al. v. Delaware & Hudson Company. Petition for mandamus to compel filing of annual report. United States circuit court, southern district of New York.

W. 0. Johnson v. Southern Pacific Company. Damages on account of personal injury, but involving also construction of the safety-appliance law. Intervention by United States applied for and allowed. United States Supreme Court.

A number of additional cases are about to be instituted to enforce compliance with the safety-appliance law.

CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS.

On March 14, 1902, an indictment was returned in the district court of the United States for the western district of Kentucky charging the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company with failure to file tariffs with the Commission, as required by section 6 of the act. This case is set for trial at the March term, 1903.

In the western district of Tennessee indictments were found on May 28, 1902, against the Illinois Central Railroad Company, the Southern Railway Company, the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company, the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company, the Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway Company, and also against J. T. Harahan, second vice-president; T. J. Hudson, traffic manager, and F. B. Bowes, general freight agent of the Illinois Central Railroad Company; W. W. Finley, second vice-president Southern Railway Company; B. L. Winchell, vice-president and general manager of the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company; C. B. Compton, traffic manager, and D. M. Goodwyn, general freight agent of the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, and Horace F. Smith, traffic manager of the Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway Company, for pooling cotton shipped from Memphis to various interstate destinations.

Indictments are also pending in the northern district of Georgia against the Western & Atlantic Railroad Company, the Atlanta & West Point Railroad Company, the Southern Railway Company, the Georgia Railroad & Banking Company, the Seaboard Air Line Railway Company, and W. H. Pleasants, traffic manager, and C. R. Capps, general freight agent, of the Seaboard Air Line Railway Company; Horace F. Smith, traffic manager, and J. A. Sams, division freight agent, of the Western & Atlantic Railroad Company; C. A. Wickersham, general manager, and R. E. Lutz, traffic manager, of the Atlanta & West Point Railroad Company; W. W. Finley, second vicepresident, and E. A. Niel, general freight agent, of the Southern Railway Company; T. K. Scott, general manager, and A. G. Jackson, general freight agent, of the Georgia Railroad & Banking Company, and Samuel F. Parrott, for pooling cotton shipped from Atlanta to various destinations.

United States v. Wabash Railroad Company. Criminal information for failure to report accidents under the act of March 3, 1901. United States district court, eastern division of the eastern judicial district of Missouri.

United States v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company. Criminal information for failure to report accidents under the act of March 3, 1901. United States district court, northern district of Illinois.

SAFETY APPLIANCES.

Since the last annual report of the Commission the safety-appliance law of March 2, 1893, has been amended in several important particulars by an act approved March.2, 1903. This act went into effect on the 1st of September. The original act required that each train should have a sufficient number of cars in it so equipped with power and train brakes that the engineer on the locomotive drawing such train could control its speed without requiring brakemen to use the common hand brake for that purpose. But the word “sufficient” proved to be too indefinite, owing to the varying conditions of service. To show in any given case that a sufficient number had not been used was difficult and rendered the enforcement of the law in this particular practically impossible. Therefore the necessity was felt for a change in the law which would require a fixed minimum percentage of 50 per cent to be used. This was effected by the amendment, and the Commission's inspectors now have a definite basis to

At the same time the railroads are in no way relieved from the obligation to have a "sufficient" number of "air cars” in every train. In cases where, because of steep grades or high speed, safety requires more than the 50 per cent specified in the amendment, the railroad is responsible, in accordance with the terms of the original law, for the use of enough power brakes to insure efficient control of speed without hand brakes.

work upon.

THE LAW NOW APPLIES TO ALL EQUIPMENT.

It was

The necessity of showing that a car was engaged in interstate commerce was another difficulty in the way of enforcing the law. necessary to get at the billing showing destination of cars and to prove in each case that the car complained of was actually moving or used in interstate commerce at the time its defect was discovered. The amendment in question has obviated this difficulty. The law now applies to all equipment on the lines of carriers engaged in interstate commerce without regard to the service in which it is used.

Again, the use of tenders not equipped with automatic couplers limited the operation of the law. One of the United States courts held that a tender of a locomotive was not a car (although Webster's Dictionary describes a tender as a car attached to a locomotive * *), and while it is doubtful whether this judicial interpretation, upon review, would be sustained, it was deemed advisable to forestall further litigation, and, therefore, the law was so amended as to cover "all trains, locomotives, tenders, cars, and similar vehicles used on any railroad engaged in interstate commerce.” It, therefore, now covers snow plows, cabooses, derrick cars, and all other special vehicles; in fact, everything which requires to be coupled.

TO COUPLE AUTOMATICALLY BY IMPACT.

In the Johnson case, to which reference was made in our last annual report, it was held that using a car with one type of coupler in connection with an engine with a different type of coupler, which types would not couple automatically by impact as the law requires, was not a violation of the act-a decision which largely defeated the purpose of the law, which was that men should not be required to go between cars to couple or uncouple. The Commission has always been of opinion that the coupler law was complied with only when the couplers of a train were in a condition to couple and actually could be coupled or uncoupled without the hazard of going between the cars. The different railroad technical associations had for many years striven for an interchangeable type of coupler prior to the passage of the act, and the roads he d agreed to adopt one type on the obvious theory that only thus could the law be complied with. To further promote this evident purpose of the act it was deemed wise to insert in the amendment a provision that the act should apply “in all cases, whether or not the couplers brought together are of the same kind, make, or type.”

Although it was believed that the decision of the circuit court of appeals was erroneous, it was deemed prudent, while the matter was under consideration by the Congress, to insert the words quoted above. The Attorney-General has intervened in this case. A writ of certiorari has been granted, and the question involved, which has great interest for thousands of railway employees, will be determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.

The railroads have now had ten years to put their equipment in condition to meet the requirements of the law, and it should be complied with in every detail. The loss yearly of hundreds of lives, the disablement of many thousands, and the individual suffering, still unrelieved, make up such a record that the Commission can not relax its vigilance in any particular.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »