SECTION 16.

Page

§ 283.. Petition to United States courts in cases of disobedience to order of Commission.....

324

332

294. The provision as to supersedeas applies only to appeals from Circuit Courts.....

$283. Petition to United States courts in cases of disobedience to order of Commission.- SEC. 16. (As amended March 2. 1889.) That whenever any common carrier, as defined in and subject to the provisions of this act, shall violate, or refuse or neglect to obey or perform any lawful order or requirement of the Commission created by this act, not founded upon a controversy requiring a trial by jury, as provided by the seventh amendment to the Constitution of the United States, it shall be lawful for the Commission or for any company or person interested in such order or requirement, to apply in a summary way, by petition, to the circuit court of the United States sitting in equity in the judicial district in which the common carrier complained of has its principal office, or in which the violation or disobedience of such order or requirement shall happen, alleging such violation or disobedience, as the case may be; and the said court shall have power to hear and determine the matter, on such short notice to the common carrier complained of as the court shall deem reasonable; and such notice may be served on such common carrier, his or its officers, agents, or servants in such manner as the court shall direct; and said court shall proceed to hear and determine the matter speedily as a court of equity, and without the formal pleadings and proceedings applicable to ordinary suits in equity, but in such manner as to do justice in the premises; and to this end such court shall have power, if it think fit, to direct and prosecute in such mode and by such persons as it may appoint, all such inquiries as the court may think needful to enable it to form a just judgment in the matter of such petition; and on such hearing the findings of fact in the report of said Commission shall be prima facie evidence of the

matters therein stated; and if it be made to appear to such court, on such hearing or on report of any such person or persons, that the lawful order or requirement of said Commission drawn in question has been violated or disobeyed, it shall be lawful for such court to issue a writ of injunction or other proper process, mandatory or otherwise, to restrain such common carrier from further continuing such violation or disobedience of such order or requirement of said Commission, and enjoining obedience to the same; and in case of any disobedience of any such writ of injunction or other proper process, mandatory or otherwise, it shall be lawful for such court to issue writs of attachment, or any other process of said court incident or applicable to writs of injunction or other proper process, mandatory or otherwise, against such common carrier, and if a corporation, against one or more of the directors, officers, or agents of the same, or against any owner, lessee, trustee, receiver, or other person failing to obey such writ of injunction, or other proper process, mandatory or otherwise; and said court may, if it shall think fit, make an order directing such common carrier or other person so disobeying such writ of injunction or other proper process, mandatory or otherwise, to pay such sum of money, not exceeding for each carrier or person in default the sum of five hundred dollars for every day, after a day to be named in the order, that such carrier or other person shall fail to obey such injunction or other proper process, mandatory or otherwise; and such moneys shall be payable as the court shall direct, either to the party complaining or into court to abide the ultimate decision of the court, or into the treasury; and payment thereof may, without prejudice to any other mode of recovering the same, be enforced by attachment or order in the nature of a writ of execution, in like manner as if the same had been recovered by a final decree in personam in such court. When the subject in dispute shall be of the value of two thousand dollars or more, either party to such proceeding before said court may appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, under the same regulations now provided by law in respect of security for such appeal; but such appeal shall not operate to stay or supersede the order of the court or the execution of any writ or process thereon; and such court may, in every such matter, order the payment of such costs and counsel fees as shall be deemed reasonable. Whenever any such petition shall be filed or presented by the Commission it shall be the duty of the district attorney, under the direction of the Attorney-General of the United States, to prosecute the same; and the costs and expenses of such prosecution shall be paid out of the appropriation for the expenses of the courts of the United States.

If the matters involved in any such order or requirement of said Commission are founded upon a controversy requiring a

trial by jury, as provided by the seventh amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and any such common carrier shall violate or refuse or neglect to obey or perform the same, after notice given by said Commission as provided in the fifteenth section of this act, it shall be lawful for any company or person interested in such order or requirement to apply in a summary way by petition to the circuit court of the United States sitting as a court of law in the judicial district in which the carrier complained of has its principal office, or in which the violation or disobedience of such order or requirement shall happen, alleging such violation or disobedience as the case may be; and said court shall by its order then fix a time and place for the trial of said cause, which shall not be less than twenty nor more than forty days from the time said order is made, and it shall be the duty of the marshal of the district in which said proceeding is pending to forthwith serve a copy of said petition, and of said order, upon each of the defendants, and it shall be the duty of the defendants to file their answers to said petition within ten days after the service of the same upon them as aforesaid. At the trial the findings of fact of said Commission as set forth in its report shall be prima facie evidence of the matters therein stated, and if either party shall demand a jury or shall omit to waive a jury the court shall, by its order, direct the marshal forthwith to summon a jury to try the cause; but if all the parties shall waive a jury in writing then the court shall try the issues in said cause and render its judgment thereon. If the subject in dispute shall be of the value of two thousand dollars or more either party may appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States under the same regulations now provided by law in respect to security for such appeal; but such appeal must be taken within twenty days from the day of rendition of the judgment of said circuit court. If the judgment of the circuit court shall be in favor of the party complaining he or they shall be entitled to recover a reasonable counsel or attorney's fee, to be fixed by the court, which shall be collected as part of the costs in the case. For the purposes of this act, excepting its penal provisions, the circuit courts of the United States shall be deemed to be always in session.

§ 284. The saving of the right of trial by jury. The Amendment of March 2, 1889, excepted in the first paragraph from the equity jurisdiction of the court the orders not founded upon a controversy requiring trial by jury, as provided by the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and also provided in the last paragraph for the trial by jury of such controversies. The Seventh Amendment to the Constitution provides that in suits at common law where

the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States than according to the ruling of the common law. This Amendment of 1889 was made in view of the express requirement in section 14 that the Commission should make recommendation as to what reparation, if any, should be made by the common carrier to any party or parties who may have been found to have been injured.

In Interstate Commerce Commission v. W., N. Y. & P. R. R. 82 Fed. Rep. 192 (W. Dist. of Penn.), the complaint of the Commission contained a requirement that the railroad companies should make reparation to the complaining shippers, and included a finding and an order to the amount each complainant. was entitled to recover as reparation for defendant's alleged unlawful charges. The Circuit Court sustained a demurrer to so much of the petition as related to reparation claims, holding that the Court had no power to enforce such orders. The Court said that the distinction between legal and equitable rights and remedies was sharply defined in the Act, and that each claimant had a plain, adequate and complete remedy at law. The railroads could not be deprived of their rights of trial by jury, by reason of the fact that claimants had seen fit, in the first instance, to apply to the Commission. The jurisdiction of the Court was auxiliary and limited, and the principle in equity to have taken jurisdiction to go through with the case was not applicable. It would follow therefore that the right of each shipper to reparation and damages is a separate legal controversy, which is entitled to a jury trial when in excess of twenty dollars. The Commission proceeded upon this view in a late case, that of the Texas Cattle Raisers. (10 I. C. C. R. 83), and directed each of the individual members of the complaining association seeking damages, to file a claim in the nature of an intervening petition with a specification giving as definitely as possible, the dates and amounts paid. The Commission said however that the law as to the procedure in the enforcement of such claims was unsettled.

§ 285. Limitations of actions for reparation. In the case last cited, the Commission discussed the question of limitations,

and inclined to the opinion that the beginning of proceedings before the Commission should be treated as the beginning of the suit by the filing of the original petition before the Commission. This question however of the application of the statute of limitations to such claims has not been judicially determined. It would seem from analogy to the application of the statute in suits brought by shippers under sections 8 and 9, (see supra), that the limitation statute as to such rights of action, in the states where the claim is sought to be enforced, should control, and the beginning of the suit to enforce the individual claimant's rights to reparation should be the beginning of the action within the meaning of such statute.

$286. Jurisdiction of the Circuit Court.- The petition of the Commission is to be filed in the Circuit Court of the United States in the judicial district where the common carrier complained of has his principal office, or in which the violation or disobedience of this order shall happen. In Interstate Commerce Commission v. W., N. Y. & P. R. R., 82 Fed. Rep. 192, the court said that the violation within the judicial district of the order of the Commission by any one of the defendants. who were parties to the common arrangement for interstate shipments, was violation or disobedience of all the defendants who were parties to and acting under the common arrangement, and that all of them were subject to the jurisdiction of the court in the district wherein the offense was committed.

See also Commission v. Southern Pacific Ry., 74 Fed. Rep. 42; Commission v. So. Pa. R. R. Co. et al., 123 Fed. Rep. 597. $287. Proper and necessary parties to procedure.- Proceedings in the Circuit Court to enforce the orders of the Commission may be filed by any company or person interested in the order of the Commission, or by the Commission itself, as a party complainant. In Texas & Pacific R. R. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 162 U. S. 197, 40 L. Ed. 840, the Supreme Court said that the Interstate Commerce Commission was a body corporate, with legal capacity to be a party plaintiff or defendant in the federal courts. When the petition is filed or presented by the Commission, it is the duty of the district attorney under direction of the Attorney General of the United States to prosecute. Suit may also be brought by the United States at the expense of the Commission without any preliminary proceeding before the Commission.