Marshall County Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1856-1878, 1874-06-11
The Railroad Contest in Wisconsin
Battle of the MOnOpOlists.

The Railroad Contest in Wisconsin,
Battle of the Monopolists.
Last winter the Wisconsin Legisla-
ture passed an act known as the Potter
bill, limiting the rates and charges of
the railroad corporations ia that State.
The act was very obnoxious to the rail-
way corporations, and the Chicago and
Northwestern railroad undertook the
work of resisting its execution. The
principal ground of resistance is based
upon the allegation that if the law is
obeyed the business of the road will
become improbable. Consequently
we see the remarkable spectacle of the
railroads boldly defying the laws of a
State, and ignoring the proclamation of
the Governor, charged with the execu-
ton of the law. AS a matter of course,
the next step will be to test the validity
of the act in the courts but instead of
waiting to make their arguments before
the only tribunal which can legally de-
termine the question, the roads are
seeking to forestall the decision by ex-
erting an influence upon public opin
ion. To this end the "opinions of two
eminent lawyers-Benjamin r. Curtis,
of Massachusetts,, and William nj.
Evarts, of this city-have been OBJ
tanned, both of these legists upholding
the right of the road to set aside the
law.
In all the railroad contests which
have taken place in this country, there
is none so remarkable in every phase as
this one. The first point which will
strike the reader is the fact that opin-
ions SO hastily prepared were not in
tended merely for the guidance of the
company, but for publication. Though
both opinions are aimed at the Potter
bill, asserting that the law does not
come within the powers reserved to the
State, and has the effect of confiscating
and destroying the value of property
in word, that the act is unconditional
and void-neither the paper of Judge
Curtis nor of Mr.. Evarts has the dis
passionate tone of legal opinion, but
each is rather powerful argument ad-
dressed to the people. The sophistry
of Mr.. Curtis reasoning may easily be
understood from his denial of the only
position which can be maintained for
the safety of the community-namely,
that railroad companies are public, not
private, corporations. When Mr.. Cur
tbs and Mr.. Evarts argue the contrary,
they are urging tyranny upon the
people worse than any that can ever be
exercised by the powers at Washington
or at the State capitals. Is it possible
that the State Legislatures have been
alternating the public domain for the
benefit of railroad corporations without
any power to regulate the charges of
such corporation? The affirmative of
this proposition is the assumption of
these lawyers, and they bring both ar
gument and legal decision to uphold
position so extraordin airy. If this posi-
ton is a tenable one, the sway of
monopoly In this country has only be-
gun.
The contest in Wisconsin will settle
the question whether the railroads are
the supreme power IL State in the
matters of travel and transportation.
The right to alter or repeal all general
or special acts of the Legislature is
guaranteed to the Legislature by the
Constitution of the State. Even Mr..
Curtis does not altogether deny this,
but he seeks to show that this power is
limited power; in other words, that
it does not extend to imposing restric-
tions and duties upon great corpora
tons. This is simply placing the cor
poration above the law and above the
Constitution, and that, too, upon the
singular ground that it is unconstitu-
tional not to allow the corporations to
do as they please. This argument is
worthy of Jack Bunsby, and it must
have been under the inspiration of that
noted individual that Messrs. Curtis
and Evarts sat down to write. They
argue sophistries that would, if accept
ed, destroy the liberties OK the people.
If railroads are only in limited sense
public highways, and If railroad corpO-
rations are in any sense at all only pri-
vate corporations, the States and the
legislatures have been forging chains
for the people the severity of which is
unequaled by the powers of an auto
crat. But the Chicago and Northwest
ern railroad is evidently not we'll as
sured of the tenability of this position.
Knowing the powers they claim they
may well doubt whether the courts will
assist to rivet the chains of the people
by confirming their claims. 1t is for
this reason that so much ado is made
about this matter. Some of the Wis
consin papers declare that the assertion
that the tariff under the Potter bill will
not pay is pretense. However this
may be, it is certain, Notwithstanding
the apparent determination to carry the
question into the courts, that the rail-
roads are not anxious to try the issue
there. The effort to make public opin-
ion indicates purpose to fight out the
battle in the Legislature. The railroads
seek to defy the obnoxious law upon the
pretense of testing it only that they
may secure its repeal. For them this
would be as much triumph as success
IN the courts.
The difference in the attitude of the
railroads toward the people now and a
few years ago is very marked. 1t is not
long since the most of them were beg
ging land grants from the State and
from Congress for the purpose of build:
ing the roads. The public domain thus
alienated it was pretended was as much
for the benefit of the people as of the