, 1873-04-05
Yesterdays Debate In Tho House on
tho I[iltirup Railroad Bill.
Tho Bill Providing for the Defense Of
Citizens in Railroad Suits
Passed the House.
Adverse Report OH the PROPOSE
tion to. Abolish Certain
Chicago Boards.
Einnl Passage Of the Chicago Real Es.
tate Exchange Bill.

tate Exchange Bill.
Special Dispatch to The Chicago Tribune,
TIE RAILROAD QUESTION.
gpn1NoF1ELp, April 4.-Tho nailroad bills wero
eoachod as tho special order, Hildrup's bill, GIT.
boing under consideration, md the question on
It's reference to special committee OF hftoon.
Tho motion WINS entorod on tho day OF tho
Tnrrners' Convention, out Of dofcrenco to tho
farmers but, as they had gono home, the OBJ
loot Of tho roforence was removed md tito
motion to rofor WAS logt-80 to 81.
hlr. Mooro Of Adams, objected to tho bill, be-
ca,1so It attempted to rogulate tho evidoucc by
which tho reasonablonoss Of tho charges should
be tried. He questioned the 1oga1ity Of
attempting to mike tho schodulo OF
rates f1ed by tho Commissioners pr1ma-faolo
evidence Of tho unroaaonablonoss or tho
charges. Ho quoted from docialon by 3u.ag9o
she0n IN spR9Ttt q thn e oew spor
prima- -facio evidence. These provisions SUD
yorted the principles Of common law, and letE @ no
barrier to tho limit Of legislative tyranny. Inc
which tic Bill donfol. Giving these casos pr,
,oritv Of all othora on tho docket, was special
legislation relating to railroads. It was also
special to deny change o.
.reaulatiua procedure in oourta, and Che passage
OF special laws providing Tor changes q venue
Court Of tho right to pass upon questions Il 1 Of
fact was simply absurd, as It prevented 1t from
feyorsing verdicts thnt might bo outrageous.
Tho right to fix rates for ono year implied the
,T6e railroads wero bound to charge only reaaon-
able rates, but what was reasonable ono day
might bo unreasonable tho next. On tho whole,
.ho believed tho bill WIS unconstitutional and use
;loBa.
Mr.. Armstrong, Of La5alle, was opposed to
hi, chancery proceeding. Tho provision that the
casea should havo priority In court meant TINT
private sntore should dance ettenaGnoe On On fa, aa.
opposed @ to giving q GOD attorney foos., He did
ut lilo tho iilea Of d shorin stopping trains at
viii. There might DO fruit or some porshablo
commodity com on train that would bo destroyed by
Dolby. Ho had objections to that bill, and would
only voto for It ae q last resort, and With great
reluctance. II that bill passed, thoit railroad
logialation would prove delusion na and snaro, @
Ind boon dono Ho had hoard that no o1 post
faoto law could bo passed to impair tho obliga-
tion of contract and ho was disposod to think
tion. They should not blamo Judges for obey
ine their solomn oathB and rendering t1er YER
diets In accordance therewith.
n1r. Carpenter believed II thoy passed tho bill
thoy would bo tho laughing stock Of tho people,
aa In his estimation 1t was not worth the paper it
nj; swan had two objections , tt, to tho ,,1 hi Ill.,
dayf e bo 'nfnge fos from rsyon and by tSe
Supreme Court. On the denial Of change of
vonuo, the railroads could take tho oAses to tho
Supreme Court and shut them all up for year
d LII. Oollna believed the bill failed to meet tho
oh hyenoy Of tho timos He was oppoaod to, tho
cl1nn cory proceeding. The sua1u idea might DO
in e n S 1S ssea sSa ao e Ell wa waa nos the
article desired. Ho believed It should be rccom-
mtted foi amendment, aud, IN sho meantime,
tho House should pass the Senate ponahue)
bill. Wore ho compelled to vote for tho Dill, 1t
would lilo under protest.
Mr. MONT wanted tho issue fairly mn1e be-
tween tho railroads md tue people. -...
Mr., Morrison thought tho bill was burloaquo,
and went on to argue againat lton Constitutional
Mr. Quinn believed any law passed should
obey tho Constitution, and fix maximum roaaon-
Mr. Thornton offered resolution instruoting
tho Rai1rond Committee to report back IN tho
morning all bills in its possession, and it was
adopted.
lit would moot tic fato of its predecessor, and
tho fato that was in Btoro for tho Passenger bill
twas baBod On a. false theory. Ho did not be.
love tho State had right to ~ tho rates Of
aoo Rne eG L e bsd III tho sae could the
fare from Springfield to Chicago should be 81,
It would follow that tho railroads could collect
tho fares from tho stnte if tl!o passengers ro-
for upon the Legislature this power. Hc Was
satisfied tho railroads would own tho Logisla-
turo, and perhaps tho people would have to pay
cents milo, Ho believed tho railroads had
vested right to carry freight at Q reasonable
compensation, because tho Legislature might
compel them to carry it at an unreasonable COM
ponaation. The Supreme Court held that, in
bpito Of their charters, railroads were subject to
unjust discrimination. That, was sufficient.
WAS there any danger TINT they could not con-
vict railrouls7 Would not jurics find them
guilty His experience waa thas 1uraea wefo g. g.,
co,11d convict any railroad of extoftion Or OF un-
lust discrimination it he only had tho facts
boforo O jury. His theory was thnt there
.so@mon soans 20 LAW. fd.' Such legislation would
be clearly and without doubt constitutional The
Senate Donahae bill was based upon that theo-
ry, and he detlod any lawyer to find flaS in such
discussion, mud the railroads would aoon find
-thom out Tho railroads would furnish sho
schedule, but TINT waa all, as there WAS nothing
In tho Inv to enforce the schedulo after tho Com
no wy Of getting thom into court, aud if they
re1nniS there perhaps for yoara. Il
tho n fap Sore wod tnS fstes after H. be BE-
only nm imaginary limo dividing tho highest roa-
sonablo from tho lowest unreasonable. ,,,
hfr. Donham vent on to eviacerate the Dill,
making IN ablo argument Of two hours.
Mr. bhaw believed tho Legislature llad COM
mon law right to fix ratos independent Of the
Constitution. KailroRlB took thoir charters
aubioct to tie common law restrictions na COM
mon carriers, and subject to tho right OF e,nl-
nont domain always inherent IL the poo
BE. Thoro waa power under, tho, oonst!.
button to fix reasonable Tntos, but they
lad no way Of finding out what reasonable 1atoa
were. In dotenBe to tho bill, be contondcd that
no powers wero de!ogatol to the Commission 10
whose functions woro moroly ministerial. Tht
Commission lid net fix the RITES, but loft 1t to
Jury. lie beloved tho decision Of Jury or
uucstlona OF fact was In accordance with TIL
common law. Tho cllaneory proceedings vert
objected to OIL the ground TINT they wore tedlous
but ho know Of no short cnt to ltigato With rail
roada. IIe granted that tho delegation, q