Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1874-04-01

to hard pan; to find out what was their
actual cost, and to grade the price OF
freiohts on that actual cost and the run
ming expenses, which we all understand
would bring the rates below what they
now are on such roads. Yet the long
roads are now carrying their through
freight in many instances at less than cost,
and if you cut down the rates on competing
roads they cannot except at ruinous sacrl-
fees engage in this competition, and the
business must thus necessarily be diverted
from the long roads, thus bringing about
rs the result a preference of one road to
another, and us Il consequence the prefer
ence of the ports at the termini of such
roads over the ports less favorably
situated.
But, Mr.. Speaker, | have been led by
questions addressed to me Il little away
from the order in which l proposed to dis
cuss this bill; and inasmuch us | have SO
begun may as well go on in this desulto-
~ manner and speak of other consider
ations that have occurred to me during
nv examination of it. 1t has been argued
that common carriers must carry for Il
reasonable price, and that Congress may
therefore. rs regulation of commerce.
compel railroads to carry freight ut Il
reasonable price. Now, | nave not been
able to see any connection, so far as the
constitutional power of regulating COM
merce is concerned, between that and the
law with respect to common carriers.
We cannot take charge of these railroads;
we ,annot regulate freights upon these
railroads because they are common car
riers. This is not the way we get the
power, if we have it ut all We get the
power of regulation, so far rs we have it
at all, because they engage in commerce
between the States; and they may be en-
gagged in this commerce, not as common
carriers, but quite independently OF that,
as express companies, or in any other way.
Our power comes from the provision OF the
Constitution to regulate commerce. The
question whether they are common carriers
has nothing TO do with it; nor has the fact
that at the time of the adoption of our
Constitution the Parliament of England
had BY statutes fixed rates of freight over
the highways of the kingdom of Great
Britain. The two powers are distinct, anu
should not be confounded in the consider
alton of this bill The only question Is, l.
the measure embodied in this bill a proper
exercise of the constitutional power OF
Congress to regulate commerce, and the
analogies that are attempted to be found,
therefore, in any government regulation OF
common carriers, whether ancient or
modern, are misleading, Enthusiastically.
and deceptive.
And so. sir. when the common law has
been stated here i'll respect to common
carriers. it seems 10 me that that Is not
pertincn to this inquiry. have been I'M
able to find any case which fully main
tains the law that has been quoted here 50
often in respect to common carriers
find enough dicta Of the law writers to the
effect that common carriers can only
charge Il reasonable rate; but | have been
unable to find a case where suit has been
brought tglinst them for refusing in adj
vance To carry goods at rates they had
previously fixed. Suits have been brought
in many cases where they took the mer-
chandise and transported it without any
thing being said is to the price; and In the
end the courts held that the price they cX-
acted was too large. and they We're only
allowed to retain what their services were
worth. But have not been able to find a
case, and none has been cited, where that
precise question has been before the court,
and it has been denied that a railroad OF
other common carrier had ii right to make
Il contract or fix the price which 1t should
receive for transporting freight or passen-
gers. And considering that. as is assert
ed, this has been the law for a hundred
years, it is singular that some such case
should never have arisen. and the courts
should not have settled long ago that ii
WAS already within their province to
regulate this matter of freight and the
rates for carrying passengers on railroads.
Mr.. &. +. IoAR. Does not the gentle
man find in the ancient English eases
The declarations are very numerous THAI
that is the rule of law
Mr.. WILLARD, Of Vermont. | hay,
. found such declarations, but have always
found the case to be something else.
Mi G. +. H0AR. VIII the gentleman
allow me to ask him one other question?
Mr.. WILLARD, of Vermont. Certainly
Mr.. G.. F. IIoAR. Has not the gentle
man in his researches also found that il
was the ancient English practice to regu-
late the charge of the public carrier OF
merchandise by the court ofses>ions fixing
in advance his rates?
/ Mr.. WILLARD. of Vermont . YES. Mr.
Speaker; the English Parliament passed !;
law providing that 4 certain commission
the court of sessions. think it WAS, shoulo
regulate rates over the highways of Eng
land 80 understand it,
Mr.. q. +. IloAE. 50 that j. it not tru,
that when cur Constitution was adopted
our fathers found that the habit of fixing
by commission the rates for public ear
riers for merchandise WAS an ancient Eng
fish regulation of commerce?
Mr.. WILLARD. Of Vermont. My re
collection is that this country separate,
itself from Great Britain in a con>idcrabl,
/ degree because it did not like English
! laws. and have never supposed that they
/ adopted Is laws in this country any law:
other than those that the courts NIGH
hold were Just and proper. Now, | dc
agree that the Parliament of England hat
regulated freights by Statute. | agree thai
our State Legislatures have power to re
gulate the price for CARRYING freights
The Parliament Of England regulate,
many other things: they regulated the
price of bread; they granted monopolies
/ they regulated the price of grain in til,
/ earlier history of the country. They con
sidercd that they had the prerogativc t,
degulatc almost everything that subject
/ of the realm did But do not suppose
because they did such things that we hav,
the. same power: or if We had could wise
/ ly exercise ii. hope that we have 90
away from the state and government regu
lations taat used to prevail in the Garlic
! history of civilization, and | should lik
some better precedents for such z bill :,
this than the old English method of regu
lating by Parliament or royal decree ever,
thing which the subjects Of that realm
might undertake to do. The law in re
gard to common carriers, where there
no statutory regulation. is well settled
but we know that. Dur Legislatures ar
continually passing laws releasing f
some extent common carriers from thes
ancient liabilities, releasing inn-keeper
from some of the old common-law liabili
ties, and allowing them to make specir
contracts in particular eases, limiting thei
liabilities by notice to their customers
Our Legislatures have agreed that the
ought to be allowed by contract to limi