United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Ass'n

Decision Date28 November 1892
Docket Number6,799.
PartiesUNITED STATES v. TRANS-MISSOURI FREIGHT ASS'N et al.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Kansas

J. W Ady and S. R. Peters, for complainant.

George R. Peck, B. P. Waggener, Wolcott & Vaile, Wallace Pratt, J P. Dana, Spencer, Burnes & Mosman, J. D. Strong, W. F Guthrie, J. M. Thurston, A. L. Williams, N. H. Loomis, R. W Blair, John R. Hawley, W. F. Evans, M. A. Low, James Hagerman, and T. N. Sedgwick, for defendants.

RINER District Judge.

This is a bill in equity, brought by the United States attorney for the district of Kansas, by direction of the attorney general, in the name of the United States against the Trans-Missouri Freight Association and 18 railway companies, which, it is alleged in the bill, constitute the association.

The object and purpose of the bill is to obtain a decree declaring said freight association dissolved, and enjoining defendants, and each of them, from carrying out the terms of a certain memorandum of agreement entered into by and between the 18 railway companies forming this association, which agreement, it is alleged, is unlawful, because maintained by said railway companies in violation of an act of congress, entitled 'An act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies,' approved July 2, 1890.

It is alleged in the bill that the defendants (the 18 railway companies) are common carriers incorporated under public statutes of several states and of the United States, and are engaged in moving, carrying, and transporting freight and commodities in the commerce, trade, and traffic which is continuously carried on among and between the several states of the United States, and among and between the several states and territories of the United States, and between the states and territories of the United States and foreign countries; and that prior to March 15, 1889, each of the defendant railway companies owned, operated, and controlled separate lines of railroad, and furnished to persons engaged in trade and others, among the states and territories of the United States, separate, distinct, and competing lines of transportation between the states and territories of the United States lying west of the Missouri river and east of the Pacific ocean, and that to encourage and secure the benefit of the competing lines of transportation throughout that region of country the government of the United States and the states and territories within the region just mentioned had granted to the defendants public franchises, land grants, securities, and subsidies of great value. That on the 15th day of March, 1889, the defendant railway companies, not being content with the rates of freight they could receive with free competition among themselves, but contriving and intending unjustly and oppressively to establish and maintain arbitrary rates of freight and transportation in the interstate commerce throughout said region, did combine, conspire, confederate, and unlawfully agree together, and did enter into a written agreement and contract, known as the 'Memorandum of Agreement of the Trans-Missouri Freight Association,' by the terms of which said agreement the association has control of all competitive traffic between points in that region of country lying west of a line commencing at the ninety-fifth meridian, on the Gulf of Mexico, and running north to the Red river, and thence to the eastern boundary of the Indian Territory; thence along the eastern line of said territory and of the state of Kansas to Kansas City, Mo.; thence, by the Missouri river, to the point of intersection of that river with the eastern boundary line of Montana; thence by said eastern boundary line to the international line between this country and the British possessions. That the said association, by a board created by each company appointing one person to represent it in the association, and that the several railway companies, members of the association, gave to the association the power to establish and maintain rules, regulations, and rates on all competitive traffic, through and local, within the region of country described in the agreement; and that said association, by the terms of the agreement, is given the power to punish by fine any member that reduces the rate fixed by the association.

It is further alleged in the bill that the said agreement took effect on the 1st day of April, 1889, and that ever since that time the said railway companies, by reason of said agreement and combination, and under duress of the fines and penalties prescribed in the articles of agreement, have put in force and maintained, and now maintain, tariffs and rates of freight fixed by said association; and that the officers and agents of said railway companies have, ever since said agreement took effect, refused to put in force reasonable rates of freight, based upon the cost of construction and operation of their several lines of railroad and other proper elements to be considered in the making of freight rates; and that the people engaged in trade and commerce within the region of country mentioned in said articles of agreement are, by reason of said combination and association, deprived of rates of freight, benefits, and facilities which might reasonably be expected to flow from free competition between said several lines of transportation. It is further alleged in the bill that, notwithstanding said association is in violation of the act of congress of July 2, 1890, said defendants, since the date of said act, have, and still continue to maintain, the arbitrary rates of freight fixed by the said Trans-Missouri Freight Association, to the great injury and prejudice of the public and to the people of the United States. Then follows the prayer that the defendants, and each of them, be enjoined from further agreeing, combining, conspiring, and acting together to maintain rules and regulations for carrying freight upon their several lines of railroad, to hinder trade and commerce between the states and territories of the United States; and that they be enjoined from continuing in a combination, association, or conspiracy to deprive the people engaged in trade and commerce among the states and territories of the United States of such facilities, rates, and charges of freight and transportation as will be attained by free and unrestrained competition between said several lines of railroad; and that said defendants be enjoined from agreeing, combining, conspiring, and acting together to monopolize or attempting to monopolize freight traffic in the states and territories of the United States and that all and each of them be enjoined from agreeing, combination, conspiring, and acting together to prevent each or any of their associates in said agreement from carrying freight and commodities in the trade and commerce between the states and territories of the United States, except at such rates as shall be voluntarily fixed by the officers and agents of each of said roads acting independently and separately in its own behalf.

The defendants the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company, the Chicago, Kansas & Nebraska Railway Company, and the Denver Texas & Ft. Worth Railroad Company have filed answers, denying that they were members of the Trans-Missouri Freight Association. The other 15 companies have each filed a separate answer, but, as they are substantially the same as to the facts, it will not be necessary to refer to them separately. They each admit that they are common carriers engaged in transporting persons and property among the several states and territories of the United States, and allege that, as such common carriers, they are subject to the provisions of the act of congress approved February 4, 1887, entitled 'An act to regulate commerce,' with the various amendments thereof and additions thereto, and that said act and the amendments constitute the system of regulation which has been established by congress for the common carriers subject to said act; and they deny that they are subject to the provisions of the act of congress entitled 'An act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies,' approved July 2, 1890. Further answering, the defendants admit that they severally own, control, and operate separate and distinct lines of railroad fitted up for carrying on business as common carriers of freight, independently and disconnectedly with each other, except that common interest exist between certain of the companies named in the answer. It is further admitted by the defendants that the lines of road mentioned in the bill are lines of transportation and communication engaged in freight traffic between and among the states and territories of the United States, and are through lines for freight traffic in that region of country lying west of the Mississippi and Missouri rivers and east of the Pacific ocean, but deny that they are the only such lines, and allege that there are several others, naming them. It is further admitted that prior to the organization of the freight association the defendants furnished to the public, and persons engaged in trade, traffic, and commerce between the several states and territories of the United States and countries named in the bill, separate, distinct, and competitive lines of transportation and communication, and allege that they still continue to do so. It is further admitted that some of the roads mentioned in the bill received aid by land grants from the United States, and others received aid from the states and territories by loans of credits, donations of depot sites and right of way, and in a few cases by investments of money, and the people of the said states and territories to a limited extent made...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Tidewater Oil Co v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • December 6, 1972
    ...See United States v. E. C. Knight Co., C.C., 60 F. 306; 60 F. 934; 156 U.S. 1, 15 S.Ct. 249, 39 L.Ed. 325; United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Association, C.C., 53 F. 440; 58 F. 58; 166 U.S. 290, 17 S.Ct. 540, 41 L.Ed. 1007. Moreover, there might be an appeal to the Circuit Court of Ap......
  • United States v. Californiacanneries, CO-OPERATIVE
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • May 20, 1929
    ...(C. C.) 60 F. 306; Id. (C. C. A.) 60 F. 934, 24 L. R. A. 428; Id., 156 U. S. 1, 15 S. Ct. 249, 39 l. Ed. 325; United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Association (C. C.) 53 F. 440; Id. (C. C. A.) 58 F. 58, 24 L. R. A. 73; Id. 166 U. S. 290, 17 S. Ct. 540, 41 L. Ed. 1007. Moreover, there mig......
  • United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Ass'n
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • October 2, 1893
    ...in restraint of interstate or international commerce. The opinion filed by the court below when the bill was dismissed is reported in 53 F. 440. J. Ady, for appellant. George R. Peck and Joel F. Vaile, (A. L. Williams, N. H. Loomis, R. W. Blair, John M. Thurston, O. M. Spencer, C. A. Mosman......
  • United States v. Debs
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • December 14, 1894
    ... ... as common carriers of passengers and freight between or among ... any states of the United States; ... (2) ... 'From in any way ... exercised. The case of U.S. v. Trans-Missouri Freight ... Ass'n, 53 F. 440; Id., 7 C.C.A. 15, 58 F. 58, had ... reference to a contract ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT