Town of Pelham, Ga., v. Atlantic Coast Line R. R. Co. (28 I. C. C., 433). Town of Martinsville, Va., v. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co. (See Board of Trade of Winston-Salem v. N. & W. Ry. Co.) Page. 210 211 Traffic Bureau of the Sioux City Commercial Club v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa 160 Truckers Transfer Co. v. Charleston & Western Carolina Ry. Co. (27 I. C. C., 275) 186 Union Tanning Co. v. Southern Ry. Co. (26 I. C. C., 159). 159 United Refrigerator & Ice Machine Co. v. Chicago & Northwestern Ry. Co. (28 I. C. C., 439). 210 United States v. Wharton & Northern R. R. Co. (26 I. C. C., 309). 164 Volco Mfg. Co. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co. (28 I. C. C., 289).. 205 197 185 Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co. v. Atlantic Coast Line R. R. Co. (27 I. C. C., Vulcan Iron Works v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co. (27 I. C. C., 468). Wausau Advancement Asso. v. Chicago & North Western Ry. Co. (28 I. C. C., West Point Mfg. Co. v. Chattahoochee Valley Ry. Co. (26 I. C. C., 79).. Weyl-Zuckerman & Co. v. Colorado Midland Ry. Co. (27 I. C. C., 493). 191 194 172 210 156 176 190 192 159 141 Wheeler & Motter Mercantile Co. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co. (See Wholesale Produce Dealers Asso. of Brooklyn, N. Y., v. Long Island R. R. Co. (26 I. C. C., 413).. 168 Wichita Board of Trade v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co. (25 I. C. C., 625)... 150 Wichita Wholesale Furniture Co. v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. 157 Wickwire Steel Co. v. New York Central & Hudson River R. R. Co. (27 I. C. C., 168)... 184 Wisconsin Lime & Cement Co. v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis 143 Wisconsin Steel Co. v. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R. R. Co. (27 I. C. C., 152).. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R. R. Co. (27 I. Č. C., 165)... 183 183 DIGEST OF FEDERAL COURT DECISIONS DURING THE YEAR. A discussion of court decisions, involving injunctions to restrain enforcement of orders of the Commission and of decisions relative to criminal violations of the law during this year, can be found in the text of this annual report. The decisions abstracted herein involve questions of railway regulation which are closely related to matters arising before commissions. 1. In the Supreme Court. PENALIZING FAILURE TO SETTLE PROMPTLY. In Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Co. v. Jackson Vinegar Co., 226 U. S., 217, decided December 2, 1912, it was held that the imposition under a Mississippi statute of a penalty of $25 for the failure to settle a claim for damages to an intrastate shipment between two points on the carrier's line within 60 days from the giving of notice of the claim is not unconstitutional where, upon the trial, the actual damages were assessed at the sum stated in the notice. STOCKYARD COMPANY OPERATING RAILWAY SYSTEM. In United States v. Union Stockyard & Transit Co. of Chicago, 226 U. S., 286, decided December 9, 1912, it was held that a stockyard company owning and operating a railway system for the transportation of cars to and from trunk lines in the course of their transportation from beyond the State and to points outside the State did not cease to be an interstate railway carrier within the meaning of the act to regulate commerce, and as such obliged to file its tariff with the Interstate Commerce Commission, by leasing its railway and equipment to another corporations upon the basis of a division of profits, both companies being under a common stock ownership, with its consequent control. TRAFFIC PASSING OUT OF STATE IN TRANSIT. In Ewing v. Leavenworth, 226 U. S., 464, decided January 6, 1913, it was held that an annual privilege tax levied by a municipality upon the intrastate business of an express company is not invalid because such transportation is over a route which, for a short distance, passes out of the State. FAILURE TO FURNISH FREIGHT CARS. In Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Hardwick Farmers' Elevator Co., 226 U. S., 426, it was held that Congress has so taken possession of the subject of the delivery, when called for, of railroad cars to be used in interstate traffic, by the provisions of the act to regulate commerce, as to invalidate, when applied to cars demanded for interstate transportation, the provisions of the Minnesota statute requiring railway companies to furnish freight cars on demand, under penalty for each day's delay not due to certain excepted clauses. In Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Co. v. Greenwood Grocery Co., 227 U. S., 1, decided January 20, 1913, it was held that the rule of the Mississippi Railroad Commission under which a per diem penalty may be exacted from a carrier for delay in delivering cars to the consignee at the termination of interstate transportation amounts to an unreasonable burden upon interstate commerce, where the requirement of such rule as to the delivery of the cars "within 25 hours after arrival, computing from 7 a. m. the day following the arrival," is absolute, and makes no allowance whatever for any justifiable and unavoidable cause for failure to deliver. In Hampton v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co., 227 U. S., 456, decided February 24, 1913, it was held that an interstate railway carrier which has refused to furnish cars for intrastate transportation, as required by the Arkansas statute, can not test the constitutionality of such statute, as affect |