National Republican., 1874-05-19
MIR. CARPENTER rs. TIE RAIL


The gifted and accomplished young Sen
ator from Wisconsin has Joined issue with
those barons of the law, MesSrs. Evarts and
Curtis, upon the Wisconsin railroad ques-
ton. Ina letter TO the Wisconsin State
Journal. which we regret the crowded
state of our columns will not permit US at
the present time to print Mr.. Carpenter
throws down the gauntlet TO these gentle
men. and after assuring them that he ad-
mires the skill and ingenuity with which
they have concealed the real question be-
meath arguments to establish some PROPOSE
tions which everybody comedies, and others
which, If established, would be altogether
irrelevant, proceeds to demolish their fine
spun theories and deal heavy blows
upon their supposed impenetrable armor.
There Is something chivalrous upon the
part of Mr. Carpenter in this vol
untary effort in behalf Of popular rights
and State sovereignty, and the down-trod
den, bucolic denizens of the Western plains
and prairies against giant" monopolies
and Eastern capitalists in Wall street. A
more timid or selfish man would have hest.
tated, and waited at least until he was as,
sured that comfortable fee would be forth.
coming as compensation for the legal treas,
ures he has 30 generously poured out, clear
and sparkling as the waters of his own Wis.
consin lakes but Mr.. Carpenter, with a
self-sacrifce which cannot be too highly
praised, and which stands out in marked
and glorious contrast to the example of his
more close and calculating Eastern breth-
rem, has not allowed himself to be influ-
enced by these sordid motives.
He has not the least doubt in the world
of the entire constitutionality of tue law OF
last winter whose commands these ruthless
monopolies are now so scornfully defying.
To Mr.. Carpenters mind the real question
in this whole controversy is this: ''Can the
Legislature regulate the tariff of rates to be
charged upon the railroads of the. State for
'the transportation of passengers and
freight" This is as terse and clear a way
of putting 1t as could be expressed in
words, and, in the language of our Senatorial
advocate, 'the answer to it depends upon
'the legal character Of railroads and the re-
cations which exist between the State and
'the railroad corporations or, in other
"words, whether railroad is public prop
''erty or mere private estate, and whether
these corporations are subjects of the State
'tamenable to its laws, or sovereignties in
dependent of State control" In accordance
with the decisions of the courts and of the
Supreme Court of the United States, Mr..
Carpenter maintains that railways are pub
lie highways, and, being invested with this
character, the right of the Legislature to
regulate them and control their manage
ment the same as other property exists as
logical consequence. This is plain enough,
heaven knows, and the only wonder is that
anybody should be found foolish or bold
enough to dispute it. The legal character
of railroads established. Mr.. Carpenter con-
siders the relations which exist between
the State and the companies: every rail-
road has two-fold character; first, in
relation to the State, 1t is the agent of the
State to operate q railroad of the State;
" and. second, in its relations with persons
" engaged in commerce, it is common car
" rier. To illustrate: A State not forbidden by
" its constitution might construct and equipa
" railroad and operate it: that is, run its
trains by officers appointed by the State
" and at the expense of the State. The State
might then create corporation and give it
" the monopoly Of the carrying business on
" such road. In such case no one will deny
" that the State, in enforcing such mono
poly, might provide what rates shall be
chargeable for transporting persons and
" freight" And the fact that the Legisla-
ture did not make q provision of this char
acter In its charter does not debar 1t from
the right Of subsequently doing so; because
the Legislature has the authority under the
Constitution to alter. amend, or even take
away q charter at any time. Mr.. Carpenter
tpon this point fortifies himself with two
decisions of the Supreme Court of the
United States. That portion of his opinion
in which Mr.. Curtis maintained that rail
road company, having executed mortgage,
ipso faeto, the Legislature cannot in any
way interfere with the load so as TO disap-
point the expectations of the mortgages,
Mr.. Carpenter characterizes as the most re-
markable doctrine ever enunciated by emi-
nent counsel, and satisfactorily shows 1t to
be SO by quotations from standard authori-
ties upon corporations and SO forth.
I'VE have endeavored to bring within
brief compass, without doing violence TO
them, the principal points In Nr. Carpen-