Page:United States Reports, Volume 209.djvu/90

 OCTOBER TERM, 1907. Argument for the Uited 8tte. 209 U.S. Ry. Co., 203 U.S.' 270; United $ta v. Fowkes, 53 Fed. Rep. 13; In re Balknap, 96 Fed. Rep. 614; $tat v. $m/th, 66 Missouri, 61; State v. McGraw, 87 Miouri,. 161; $tat v. Hatch, 91 Mis- souri, 568; Commonweo/th v. Parker, 165 Massachts, 526; Massachusetts, 1, 6. In export shipments, the Elkins Act applies to interstate inland carriage from the point of origin within the United States to the port of tmnshipment. The Interstate Commerce Act (� plainly applies to commerce with a ountry not adjacent. It places that commerce entirely within the operation of the �ct, whether the same is between the point of origin and the port.of transhipment or between the port of entry nd the point of destination. Texas & Pacific R. Co. v. lnterstat Commerce Commission, 162 U.S. 197. This at was designed primarily in the case of export ship- ments for the protection of the shipper; no one shipper, but shippers in the aggregate. Take away the neceity of published rates and of atherence to published rates, and there is little to prevent the carrier, by a complex and devious system of rate-making, from discriminating between various shippers similarly situated from the point of origin to the port of trim- shipment, and of so skillfully concealing or excusing the same that punishment in any given case would be well-nigh impos- sible. This, Congress foresaw, and in order to prevent this greater evil it passed a law, which may'poibly, as is the case with all laws conferring general benefits. work some temporary inconvenience in isolated caso. In any event, the discretion was with congre, and with Congress alone, and the courts cannot do otherwise than en- force the plain provisions of the legislative act. Inters tate Com- merce Commission v. Br/mson, 154 U.S. 477 et seq.; lnterstat Commerce Comniss/on v. Baltimore &�. R. Co., 145 U.S. 3. The act in question here is not unconstitutional . burdening export traffic nor as giving preference to the ports of one State over those of another. If it at all aff?cts the traffic of.ny port

�