Show EVIDENCE IN RATE CASES SUBJECT TO REVIEW IN COURT Highest Tribunal Curtails Powers of Interstate Commerce Corn Com I merce Commission j Washington V Jan 20 The O.-The The government govern govern- O ern ment meat af as r represented presente b by the interstate commerce commission met defeat detent to today a through a a decision of the court of ot the United States In Its attempt to tu establish to the commission a n right to make rates without t. substantial evidence evi dence being presented led at nta ata a hearing to show th tha of or tho time rates to be replaced Railroads of oC the country won von WOh I an Important Im Irn point when the court decided that in making rates tho the commission lon could not nol rely upon Information gathered gath gath- eyed ered In investigations by the thc commis commission sion but must base base- them thorn upon evidence e presented at a t hearing where the rall n roads road would ha have an all opportunity to present their Itlo Ido of or tiie tue controversy Thus Thu limiting the tIme power of t the time com com com- missIon the court declared that the time question of whether a an any imy substantial l evidence e had been presented in a caso case was on one of 01 law luw 1 for ol the courts auch uch a. a the tue commerce court to 0 and as t not entrusted exclusively to the c m mission ion t t ir c r- r t. t Iou Announced b by J r Vj J I ITu Justice Tu Lamur Lanmar announced tho courts court's It i d ln a a. ca case c Involving th validity of oC un an oMler reducing class rales from froim I New W Orleans d ans to Alabama Alabam titles Ho Ito r rj opted governments government's o rl nehls po portion I that the Hepburn law In pro providing ln that rates should be e set zet a d If It 1 after alter a t L I hearing the time commission should he be of or time tite opinion that the charge was n- n mea meant nt that tin the commissions commission's findings R a ai us to unreasonableness s of ot rate r v ns not subject to review by br the time court The Time justice In r reply p pointed to hat that I clau in the law which required a a. full It hearing to b ba be accorded and time the universal sal Mal course of decisions ns in lii this countr i that an aim administrative order oidor b by the government go was as void old if Issued ed t j a hearing or If Jf the hearing wn wai In Inadequate inadequate in- in j a adequate or unfair S 'S lie stated llio tho o further I contention n that C Congress c ress r required the Hit c commission sion to obtain tn Information to 1 enable it to perform Its Us ts duties s and anil I therefore wh in It l Issued su d un an ord r it f I Iwa wa was presumed to 0 o lu have obtained j i I to support Its findings s. in-s. I Such a construction told sold q c Justice Jus jus- I tt lice tice c would nullify th rl right to a n J h hemm l I Ing for tol sti there Lucre I Is no ito hearing when the party palt does not know what 1 J. J o evidence Is is offered cd or oi recorded or li linot s I not n opportunity to t t or o ore ex- ex I I on ou Page 1 C Column Jurun Z 2 I I j f RA Tf GASES CASES SUBJECT TO REVIEW IN COURT Highest Tribunal Curtails Powers of I Interstate state Commerce Com Coni- merce Commission Continued From lago 1 One plain or repudiate It The Thc Information gathered may ho bo used as tho basis bals for Instituting pro prosecutions c fc for violations of or the tho law hav and for many other put purposes poses but it is not available a no nD such in iTi cases where when the tho parties arc entitled to a n. hearing Liability A hl husbands husband's advice 11 to his wife ma may possibly be he of oC such a pecuniary value aluc that the wife m may r recover COVer damages for Cor loss of ot It according to a decision today by the tho supreme court ourt The Thc cour court In an opinion UI by Justice Lurton decided cd that under tho tito employers employers' employ employ- ers ers ers' liability act G ci of 1908 relatives of or an employee ee who lives hives several hours or longer after ater an un accident aro arc entitled to recover damages es Just as ns If tile the employee had bad been bon killed Instantly Railroad Jaw lawyers ers have o sought to es ns establish establish es- es a a. doctrine that the statute al allowed al- al lowed an employee to sue for Injuries anti and allowed his relatives es to t suo only when he lie wa was killed Instantly The They contended that If Ie tho employee lived li several so h hours urs an and anthen then then died his death extinguished not anI only his hiM own cause ot of action but that of oC his relatives This contention tho the court held was erroneous State laws which provide pro otherwise Justice Lurton said ImleJ must give gho wa way ns as far as is IE Interstate commerce commerce- was concerned at least until Congress Congre should repeal the federal law lav Annul ule The rhe supreme co court rt today annulled as Invalid the tho reciprocal demurrage ruins of or the thc Mississippi railroad commission com coin mission which char charges upon of oC In Interstate In- In rail railroads loads s for fOl delay in delivery or intrastate shipments The decision was vas based on the thc fact that the i rules did not provide for exemptions In Incase Incase case of unavoidable dela delay Inspiration nt Tho Thin supreme court tocla today decided that tha t American patents on Inventions patented patented pat pat- In foreign countries expire with tho the expiration of oC the tho foreign patent notwithstanding claims that the treaty or be Brussels of ot 1900 provides pro otherwise other The decision lon was in tho the case between tho the Cameron Septic Tank com company pan an and thO city cIti of or Knoxville la Ta Rate Bate Ca Cac ic Not Decided II The rhe supreme court concluded conclude Its opinions opinions ions today without announcing those thos on the Minnesota rate nile case cao or 01 other state rate ca cases eL |