| Show GOl T Wn O I IJU JU I Judge Philips so Holds in Case of ofU ofU U S Against Missouri Pacific et al SUIT UNDER THE ELKINS ACT Were ern With Wih Vio Violating 10 lating Its I In by l Ini City Dec 4 Judge John F Philips In the United States COIt for rr the Western o district of ot Mis lis today toda delivered an opinion hold In that his court CUlt UH without jurisdiction In the tho rases here by the federal charging the Paci Pacific fic fe tho AtchIson Topeka Santa Ja Fa and Ind other railways with wih giving 3 on In of oC 1 talt lt In Kansas und Ind on coal cOlli In Colorado other lu In I violation of or the act The Jle motion I of 0 the to the Inga tn was S grunted On March 25 G 1901 1902 at the Instigation of ur the attorney neutrals at It Wash Inston Inton Judo Judge Philips granted u 1 temp ary mry order urdel restraining the tha Missouri l lt 1 cle the tho Santa Fe the Al Alton I Iton ton th and the nock Hock Is Island Island land railway companies from al alleged on various I summer M 11 D n ua 13 I brought pro proceedings cee citing the of 01 the rail railways rol ways wart named foi tor contempt In the gallon they ther had violated courtn order In to give Tl 1 contempt were welo 11 11 Judge Philips court on Nov 14 I the tho attorneys for fOI the railways rai ilS moved that the be he claim claiming claimIng I ing that the court was 11 without Jurisdiction tion i iThe IThe ton The The grounds of o HIP decision In Philip opinion today tOlla nl substantially sub 09 s follows The Til bill bi pt pC complaint oi 01 which the tho re oller wai ai March 1902 was WIS lied ed at atthe atthe the Instance of ur the of oC tho the United States predicated on en al alleged Il violations of o the Interstate com coin commerce merce law In lu grunting rebates on 01 ship shipments shipments ments of ot grain and packing house pro products products ducts from Kansas City to eastern This suit sui was WIS upon tha th conception of ot the attorney general that the United States hall had u I right rl ht to tl to the United States circuit court COUt in inequity Inequity equity to carry cary out the policy of o the tho commerce law and to tm el Join generally from violating It I Dut But otter after the tho temporary restrain restraining ing order or or ua WI made and after the de demurrer to the original bill bi was argued and Ind submitted the court oUrt of u the United States In the cale of or Missouri lh l rl Pacific Hallway company vs s United Status Stat s one 01 hundred and United States Stales reports decided that the United States circuit court hud had no Ju Jurisdiction to grant Huch MiCh rele to po when the restraining order wal as Issued by the th United States HateM circuit court for the watern district of o the coul was id without jurisdiction to make If It Itane th leole the defendant could not ane be he I e l 1 tn b In contempt of oC the court for violating nn al order which It was wai ut to make While what Is known ns 18 the net passed pal ed by hr In Feb IMS authorized such n I proceed proceeding ing In by b the United States district nt lt terney of oC the tho jurisdiction where the of or ort t e vas Ol committed this act being hell iv I year after the th mg order of oC March 25 2 1102 I 02 had ro 10 11 order operation io 10 ns Oi to validate Tho he concluding part of or the tho courts courts opinion H II as 01 follows olos However the conduct of or the defendant railroad companies If I It b as lS alleged In these thel liana actions may have been hE or U however much disposed court cout may ma be lt to compel obedience to tu its 18 lawful man manDate Date it It It Is I with without this proceeding to draw out cut authority In to tn It the question Involved rightfully belonging to the II of nt the States circuit courts for fOl tha districts dl of ot and ant Colorado This the la IB la a 1 perpetual Injunction upon tho judge when called upon to Judicial jU power which ho hf may not disregard lr arc without standing In II con cn t ot hi his own conscience |
