The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-01-21
internal commerce OF state then may be considered
As reserved for the Tn he itself - -

- reserved for the State itself
GOVERNMENT REGULATION OF RAILROADS..
Alter showing that IN regulating commerce with
foreign nations the power OF Congress- does not
STOP at the jursdictional lines OF the several
states, but may be exercised wherever the sub
lect exists, the Court proceeds to say
ihs principie IS, il possible still more clear, when
e hs % Se sr Ssas %
mathematical line; or they are remote from each o.ner
= commerce" among them and how Is 1t to be con
States oeS @ans an aswssn S %
And the traders intercourse be between two sta'
terminate the other and probably through thIrd'
merce with the States
Judge Cooley, in his work on constitutional Lam.
itations after referring 10 this and other cases On
| the subject, says
IL doubted that Congress has the power to 20
beyond he general regulations Of comnerce which Il Is
drec ions il shall be deemed advisable, ana that
wha,eyer extent ground snail be covered ~ these
gess may establish police resulaons a. well rs the
state combining their operations 90 subjects over which
IS given control by inc constitution Cooley on Con-
stitutionat Llioitaohs. 5ooJ
| Tue very question now under consideration is
discussed ana decided by AIR. Justice Miller, OF the
supreme Court OF the United states In the case
OF Clay vs. The Cnnton Br dye Company, reported
by the American Law Register IN Januar,, 1868.
From the very able and conclusive opinion III that
case We quote rs i0llows:-
Navigation, however is only Of the elements of
commerce. ~ IS an elemant OF commerce because IL
AFFORD, The means OF transperting pssse and
other mode OF chectine this would be much an
porlaIon interchange commodities is carried on
by tnd II !, commerce as wen as When carried by
ample IN She one case as ~ the ohsr ahe commerce
he tine taat instruments adopted have mainly
OF This character tor the eampoai which has created
our great internal commerce on the rivers, was then
TO he steamboat has also come into eAiss tue
disc across sae s ahI KING os m .he
same vehice IN winch II stared the railroai now
ry.ns trade. The one has win great beaeft been
n tesa 10 ts c9ni,o ni ,ry eTa
any reason why the other should nol? however THIS
TS his conan ,ea Wholly Within hsn the ni s' Of e
mercc among the Stale, seems to me hat where these
S w eoraee 81 oar snS
bss @ % the ee 5Sa are to s tine
snaii interchange thcir commodities. there can
reason 70 doubt tha % REGULATE them is 10 regulate com
and that 90 refuse to do this is usa to discharge
As already intimaed The shacxles with which the
sors 20 bese istee N aeir , IN
Their eOnfederates. was one OF the main causes
wonderful OF ha Guc nso R
@ M wa Of or '
But are we 70 remit the most valuable tina;
ys@aoas Burdens s shc tie states 70 ae HHH
all h be the be eary
done by method not thought OF when the constitution
the tight OF Congress to prescribe AL need ana proper
any railroad which has voluntarily become part OF
o. hos lines Of interstate communication or TO o
inter a;e transportation OF persons and property Justify
The recent decision OF the supreme Court in the
case OF the State freight tax Us Wallace, 1927
seems to the committee entirey conclusive OF tine
question We are cOnside ing. In that case inter-
Stale commerce by railway was held to be the
subject exclusively oil Congressional control ana
regulation, and stature OF the State OF Pennsyl.
wanna Was held to be unconstitutional and VOID
because it attic npted TO do that winch the Court
held to be in the nature OF a regulation OF that
n T1I. n nnfa hV Sfof
was IN the shape or tax upon freight carried oy
any railroad or other transportation company
'doing business within the State OF Pennsylvania"
The Court he'd that tbs was regulation OF COM
MERGE and being such, in so far as 1t applied to
ta Tne commerce op in This was ssa uheons sac
an admirable and exhaustive treatise upon
| tie very question we are considering. Its con-
ciuslon is chat the state can make no law in the
| nature OF regulation OF commerce which can
apply 20 freight taken up wlthm the State and
! carried our, or taken up In other States and
brought within her limits" In delivering the
opinion OF the Court Mr. Justice strong said
Beyond all question the Transportation Of freight of
sale constituent OF conmercc itself THIS has
OF trade from one State 10 another Was the prominent
,dea in the minds Of the trainers OF the constitution when
merce among the several states Nor does 1t
modies i BY land or by water In either the
merce.
1t is by no means important, in order to establish
the power OF Congress to pass the Dill reported,
OF Congress over Interstate commerce Is eXclu-
sive. The power Is ample, whether it be exclusive
or not. Bnt IL seems TO the committee that the
case first cited is conclusive OF the question and
leaves no douot that the power OF Congress is eX-
elusive Upon this point the Court say
mueh debated question whether the power given
G e az fs 10 hesi
of this Court said to have been entirely vested
e Sas,
iaon: to commerce with fofeisn nations beyond those
Dg aver Sp nr e1t n TOR he
conferred upon the federal legislature by the same
this Court that the power regulate interstate well
again lie court rule has been %
clearness hat whenever subjects over which
nature national or adii o. one uniform system or plan
tnre a. 10 require exclusive gisation BY Congress
surely transportation OF passengers or merchanase
nature" ~ - WIS
These authorities leave no room for doubt con-
commerce among the several states which now
carried on by means OF railroads.. They establish
TO ali te VIE o.
State, and that 1t necessarily includes the carrying
OF ireigAt ana passengers from place In one State
TO place IN another state. 1t reaches and con-
trolls That commerce which is beyond the reach Of
any single State because not completely internal
within any one State.
The Regulation Of Charges.
This being settled, we come to the consideration
OF the second proposition, which is that the power
to regulate commerce may be exercised by enact
ing as proposed In the bill reported, that persons
and companies engaged in it public or
common carriers Shall charge no more
than reasonable rates for such carriage,
and shall IN no case be guilty or
extortiOn. 1t would seem almost selfevident that
TO SO regulate charges is to regulate commerce.
The term regulate signihes TO fix or establish
rules or regulations for the government or control
Of some particular thing. Hence it was said by
Chief justice Marshall, in Gibbons vs.. ogden,
that commerce is regulated by prescribing the
rule by which Congress Is to be governed Can
there be doubt but that to fix the rate OF toll or
compensation TO be taken by those engaged ia car
rying on commerce Is TO prescribe such a rule
Let It be remembered that we are not now to con-
slider whether the prohibition OF unreasonable
charges Is a reasonable regulation or not. The
question Is not whether such regula-