, 1874-10-07
lid not contain n provision watying tho right to
rogulato lis fnrcl, tho Inherent right to 10 30
REMAINED IN TIE fE1fHt,AT11,r

REMAINED IN TIE 1Ea1H1ArunE.
Regarding tho charters Of tho aoyoral compa-
}en w1lose consolidation now forms tho Chicago,
burlington It Quincy lsaitwny Company, tho 1t.
toincy-tIonornl aall tho record did not inform
tho Court wlotlor snoll several corpora-
tiuns wore eTer organized and tho roads
built under these HEecial charters The
that corporations organized under special acts
built tic roads and Wcro entitled 10 tho hcuolt
Of their contracts rhe roads may layo been
built Under tho general act OF 1915 for tho ncor
gentlemen, tho Court might know oshorwiao, but
jutticially thcy could not oonsilor what wns not
shown iii tIle record. The only question Of mo-
lnont tint did nrlAe was. whether 1t was d com-
potent oxorciAo of Legislative
rowEn 70 rnEscn1nE MAXIMUM HATEH
OF faro for railroads. Tho general propoattton,
lo bolioycd was not Herio,,Aly ytonied. Cottniuly
1t could not bo oontrovcrtcd upon principle or
,Ssty WhonsSor ay pornS s patnnes
tlla public that pcoplo must Of necessity
doat with him. and nro under q moral
tluross to submit to his terrns, II tic
is unrestraincd by law, then, III order to prcyent
extortion md an abuse Of his position, tho price
he u1ay charge for Hcryicos
MAY nj: REGULATED NY LAW.
Dcsfdcs, the act lit question WA paased' In
obedience to tho twelfth eeution Of tho eleventh
rrcssly onjolned upon tho General Aaaomb'y
tho passage Of acts to regulate tho ratios Of
faro and freight. No ovi1ence was ofrorod,
and nothing appoarod, In tho case to show that
maximum ratio, and as, the record showed no
legal Justification OF tho assault complained of
the Attornoy. .(}oneral submitted TINT tho judge
mont Of tho Circuit Court
SHOULD NE AFFIRMED.
Tho Hon. Q. Il. Browning, Of Quincy, on be-
half Of tho Hallway Company, closed tho argu
mont l1e deprecated tho uourao Of tho
Attorney General in striving to hayo
the maiu question waiyod Oh nero tochnicnl-
itioB. The effort to dodge was based on tho more
assertion that tho several roads wero probably
not built by tho compnnies specially chartefed
for tlat purpose. fot the fact WAS indispntablo
tE,at thoso Foads were built. and tho Chicago,
Bllrlinston l. Quincy Company vaH endowed
with all their.
15tAuN1T1Es, FRANCHISES, AND rn1y11EGEB.
He did not think 1t would Lessen tho dignity OF
tile Court to pronounce upon this question, 60
that tho corporations could lind out exactly
gyon by Judges and commentators. tho chartor
Of tho Chicago, Burlington Il Quincy Company
s n contract, aud, being such, it was
snt'0d n t. sa' p sbai pa7er ro Of
invasion by tho Legislature. It wns guaranteed
the privilege to manage its own affairs in its own
way, mud the right to levy and collect componsa-
ton for services rendered Without that guar
nutoot tho rond
NEITHER COULD, NOR WOULD, HAVE BEEN nu1rr.
Constitution is denied thd Company, and its
right from 1t, it is doubtful whethor
tho road can i'o maintained. II would
certainly bo worry nerlously appreciated
in charaotor aud value. Regarding tho nssump-
tion that this legislation was III obedience to the
requirement. of the new State Constitution, Nr.
Browning said tho mistake was often made OF
srppos,nE tho prohibition of the United States
Cona4itutipn againat imrairipg tho obligation OF
contracts only referred to State Legislatures,
but the language used rs: "No State shall pass
anyla
1MpA1R1NG THE OBLIGATION OF CONTRACTS"
by the State ia meant the sovereign power Of tho
people, whether. represented i'll Constitutional
Convention Or Legislative Assembly. It could
mt possibly DO palmer oppressed.
It yns o'clock whom Mr. Browning concluded
hiA.arEu1nent aud The honring OF tho caso. With
out iudulging III any comment Whatever, as was
tho case during tho recent Wisconsin Railroad
trial, tho Court adjourned for ono hour. It
would, perhaps, bs idlo to speculate upon tho
ACTION OF TIE COURT.
Should they dodge tho nlain question argued by
tho counsel for tho railroads. thoy will doubt
less find stronger roaHon than the technictIity
Indicated by tho Attorney General. They may
prefer to await tho decision of tho WISCONSIN
appeal case at Washington. IT. however, thoy
deem n sufficient case was made ont,
an interesting opinion may bo expected this
term. Tho eaae nppears on tho docket under tho
title OF Ncnl 1tugges ys. The People OF tho State
Of ILLINOIS, R.lgeles being tho name Of the con-
ductor who sought to eject tho complaining wit
noBs from the cur.