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

vi .ltCn.
legislative body 1t is true. Mr. speaker tha: PROM
# eentrses or destroyins PIT & iP
it stands nnioabsedy =, as ': p pr Prnyidi Tt
private properly shall not taken for pubic with
have always held when that question vas pEesente
m power impair the validity Of a contract than
State Legislature has They have held T. % sure tat
conferred up it. has enacted law that ni-ht some
legislation would not that reason be unconstlo-
have doubt they have held and would hold as Mr.
Justice Miller held in this that there is power
vested rights of individuals except by giving Just
MI Speaker, am arguing this case With reference
to the rixhts Of railroads no because bke railEad
mpuls of ms being 81 lie Of the neogei any
to be safe ad Wise amy observation-disclosures to mt IiIna
bill is passed, what d5es accomplish? It rrvides
OF freight. Now. how do these railroads exist Tnes
that have BEEN chartr u mn 81 corsi nal tor
y t eg S virtue ct s1e sac grant and th5y has9 n
That legislative enactment. road chirtered IN
ereati,ls it allows it 70 d. It cannot een
1t cannot carry oin 81 fTeitt ont Of fhe state n
bring pound OF eEht int the state il the Leg L.
pers every sense Of the word II has existnce
authority Tie measure Of its Existence its stature its
9tlnensoHs its powers. are derived wholly from the
nen give it any power take from It sny II
Of ae CONSTITUTION or laws OF the United States, Of
onrse II could not exercise those loes ana me org
respects its charter the law and reason OF its ex
Ms Pon . viii tps 9nlen nd9l5s me in 2 5-
opinion state can charter capaiiy Wit the power
t. DO business outside of the Stateoran steanlo at
in violation Of the laws Of Congress:
tRs # h sfs sW q the @ h S 5
oftsiia Of t " haTfF poS df r. Is Wholly
S he consent "f the State WceTs-n II may eNfFf
orllnal Grant. or hy virtue o ti laws II he state
The point make j. tha, power. til, ri-h;s ami
the duties OF such corporations arr created and dennr
defined bounded limited 10y any national legislation
to ltro and them. hlt vita the rsht 81 tn
s2T2r4tlons t. e4l2A und.1.'Tn IN mn
There cannot be any eon1lrrent c2e{lo. III :,
exercis a fIrlad5 the stat Ana tns regulation =
tiy IN t. them abs uteiy b. their csrer contract
With shippers such terms lpay he AIRED 1pn T.:
Eains tn Federal GOV arnnen5. ha~ become by all
Besides. the power t. x rels 'nai price involves
ma, bs fix Il 81 low a. t. -. i y-iu- Il t- prop
erty, and yeS there can be no reir.-- ,...-...
say that railroads shill carry frerh- 1'r n2thn2
the case q the taxation OF ll.ed sat. ,fi 4
extent; if grant the power t. r llate these frelt-
may fix them a. low they peasc and then make IL
compulsory thu road T. oarrs rt-t-5 az t4e irlc+
thus fixed. That i wuat th- hll dos a. h say
if the fixed il shall III efct DE- crime i- any
road :, charge more; thai ii RAILROAD shall char
eng ting Of il hesyy per9itV Y1u have established
the newer in Gdnaree- il tfI bill J. IA "a t, b. ee1zti-
tdtona not Only r. ny t1e-e ra7 al Ma
- aDiia by -sach schedule ri rate=-
Mr. BrTLER ii Massac1l-ects- more tAs--z-eii-aii
There Was h. obisetion and il MAJ ordered accord
Mr., WIZARD. Of E.rril NJ NJ. II. ~i-n :. cal
son has been r-eion as authority Tor the ll-atl'n
re asked for Il especially ls--i reas u
hold it be would he to hold that sac could
sit;n -" nov az ~ Us ba-- - - .ii, a,s rartlI ~
nsh~ay o. winch It nihi BE- t!e 9!Ier = Gn IA y
tax upon interstate commerce. ~.,.,.,-
Mr Justice StIonz held however ina tr-
The MIS- ~ i r.. ,1ltt53, ~ ,.,,,er-a H. ssve.
'A US =! q r. =. -. o .
the statute Is to our minds very evident We e2Icei
its corporations and the rights q the owners Il rtl
rantees OF franchises fr IN ts sat to exact what
( they please for the use Of their waEs 49,.
case goes aud is authority for ANYTHING reace=
yond control Of C6nEress and cann0. be enacted
here as re[ulatlon Of commerce Tn c,ur say ina;
erehip,, a. It very clearly is
~ MT SIeaker lar is ih.T5 are an5 altn2r5,les
i7en uterance to any opinions a.; a. to 1; rlaton
ad they have Invariably decided a. r Jusice Miller
decided N the Louisville al i Portland canal case AID
as Was decided IN the case 20 which aYe Just called
be Of soEeres1itI aud cerfa7,It = ~ isii =, liz.
congressional pow er 10 regulate commerce
Si1e SET nay SS' h4~ t9sn s4p STAG control
son u power TO REGULATE commerce IL tine state ~ al,
over the thing all poets Il ,rea;,d a-l hart
cred tie oorporaiIuri ii i q course i regulate The
what ii shall do ala Rat il siaiI 1T a. III III 4
the power does not rest tAe ri-ht III tle state to
regulate gl-Ilerce but CA SOY ere-n l~wsr over
sTeat9a se5 ala :, ii, @ = M -ars s
laass ~ every ''- "i--'i " i--4S III To
YIr HATLEY. 81 Connecticut L tt charter has been
trol II how Ices the gentleman ct l. the State iselsla-
has ar-ued in practically kIllinE tn charter:
MI ~IL ~ 81 'srnont hat mn H-jy has o9-
that may be equally urged against calrss-oual les
M MF WIN VIM q i fo979 s9dnf Al sn2 I ~ that
Ghlfilon state cannot relate sins - EeltLer aIi
some sentlenlen holding that tn Dartmouth CO..
ere decision was broad enough To- tax from the State
the control Of rates of trelat when i: Ed -yeI char
that the S1ye-eisn 5,S..r 5f H. r+.e e = - - a.
rihts nlsv have ye.eI ma --14- 81, f=-i a.
T"ici - a. T. r!t i ont % the liver - Snse IueIt
grant charter T. railroad there having been T..ll-
leT that inc letlslatuT a." the SAFE would NJ a. any
s1tse'.!e9i time Tal fhaEtsr e any other railrad
by which Some reach the conclusion sed The Dart
al future LEGISLATURES and prteut the STATE from Grant
m m. a ah,r1er Tor an'i,;fr TaT-: I aurreheq4
bind is sGcSe.soTs T. that extent And If Iislatr-
provision. ii seems very dauptfll te
ton Of ,onr over the cartfr ~ Blt <i,iy -l,
I'M. and shoa NOT iel bound atr further eNa-il
statement Of the law But this j. 1r, understand
or nearly all Of them. that reservation either III,
charter Itself or the constitution SRI Stale makes
NJ BrTI fl: q Mls.ciusegfz- was lot si.ar q' ~r.
River and Warren Bride cas-;
caTs int ma AlS nr! YOU could Pass e i"'-t at
Mr, BUTLFR. Of Massachusetts, That another i.idsr
Dg
Mr. WILLARD: Of Vermont. That oa-- VS. fur til
niiemaE from La mus ' r All m ait 20 i
- It 1t II case where tho legislature sdere that
mt on m "F-'- 10 '
BUT must pass from tins
aIfsil1f Z ne 9it- y .pN l.ir aI-' q 81 II 11-
much tha1 had inter d-i ea.. wish ~. an
practical one understand most ri ths .-fiyailc, =.
,t t iaint l. iat here - ntt ha.' rs1'r-n' L.
question, c h. srray,i s3aii~tr- I,i.is ar
rtsS Xer! valuable IA II dls,lss on Sst'i - u-
80 Ri, ri5 rr ihlerof - mat STAT, IN 'is--
III. ~, il Hl:aiy Tiil.n - Sat,
benz under state control At the same rlr mi
CITY And the gentlerlan insisted hat " SO Il r.-
sI"uld prnv et that ~ fb is "a mt w.
r:liroads which are wholly within the subject
t9 H. STAT T. the M,sssslppi River Thee = 4iyT
rates per ton per niie for which they Ild then
Vow. such regulation would L. hold ls-,as.l.ai1.
IN me Judgment OF every gent -einau h'
the control of the State observe thar tie entisnaf
1Foll MASSACHUSETTS, Mr. BIZ EE shakes his head.
, suppose he Is thinking the degiSi0r which
hT2uEnt into THIS diseu-ion in the EDanieI B cas-.
which was quoted by the gentleman from N:ch-au
Mt 81 kKows.l whom do fss.> now IA his
MneTs the cetri held thought dpubt VII -ti.r the
would ever hold il the was III Iiy MES.
and eFsrFd s<tSre then pax AIRED any
State broght iToa outside the s,e INTO h. Sat
Was interstate commerce, and BE- regulated hs
pne ielslstion, and there could be
control over II OF cOurse 4 rtEul ted
is puttil- any tax by the
any rlibtlon as 10 Its being brought int the
OF any tEiiig OF that sort But occurs great
stretch OF the doctrine Inc Iart of Nr Hast c.
IN that case when he said that a stesmer ru NM
Wholly "llIlln the State OF MlcbI- the Crud aG
lds River aud taking board foods d5s in Il for
point outside TIE state have nIder III.
states He had c
oplnlon said that the vessel have license
cause the river paVgahle water @: the United
III a. ~ -. =.