Summary

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black United States v. Champlin Refining Company…

But the ensuing debate left no room for doubt that the purpose of the Amendment, as its language clearly showed, was to deprive any oil company, not merely Standard, [14] of power to utilize pipe-line control to crush competition. To this end, as is shown by an Appendix following this opinion, the Amendment was designed to make public or common carriers for hire out of every private pipe-line company transporting petroleum products in interstate commerce. Senators who were opposed charged that the passage of the Amendment would do exactly this against the will of 'private' carriers.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black United States v. Champlin Refining Company…

Even without the newly engrafted, Court-created hurdles, the pipe-line provisions, for one reason or another, have never been enforced as effectively as might be desired. [20] Perhaps, therefore, no great harm will result from the Court's polite but sure frustration of the Hepburn Act's purpose. Some people in and familiar with the oil industry, however, believe that this Act should be strengthened, not weakened. [21] Be that as it may, I deem it my duty to vote to enforce the Act as Congress has passed it.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Hugo Black Hugo Black United States v. Champlin Refining Company…

Far more important than the judicial exemption of Champlin from filing papers under § 6, however, is the Court's holding that pipe-line companies engaged in interstate transportation of their own petroleum products need not act as public carriers for hire unless they have already voluntarily become 'something more' than interstate oil-carrying pipe lines.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature