, 1874-02-23

ntAtel " c"'noe, oven a6 corporation carry ono
ofitH franchises. Tlta doctrine has boon held to
DO tho law by Ill American Courts. A corpora.
tion may, OF courso, transact business In State
oslor than that III which 1t WA iocorporatcil,
but only subject to tho laws Of tho State into
which it Inns entorod. Such bony tho condition
OF onr low in regard to corporations, whether
RAILWAY or other, 1t may bo asked, How are no
going rogulato tic faro and freight ohargos OF
Interstate railways2 There aro only two wars OF
doing It, Either congrcsa must do It., or tho forty
independent State Legislatures must sgroo on a
syatom' Of Interstate commercial intercourse.
Congress is vested by tho Constitution with un-
limited rowers over commerce among tho states:
ind this power is exclusive Of tho powor
Of tho States upon tho subject. Now, tho
regulation Of commerce between tho Btates
rs has boon decided by tho courts. i'll.
oludca tito regulation Of tho means BY which it
Is carried on, whether means of navigation or
panHngo over land, whom Huch passage ia noccs-
sary to tho commercial intercourse Of the
Standardization rivers, tho ocon1,, or railroads.
Tho onactmonts Of Congroas can rcach oyory-
thing affecting the conduct Of business Of
through trims upon Interstate railways, Faro
and freight upon suo1 railways arc, according to
hlr. Rclaold, wholly under tho control OF Con-
groBs; and tlis control begins from tho mo-
melt that goods Or persons dcatined to bo carried
nerosa State lines aro ta1on iii charge by tho rail-
way company, and not merely whom thoy hayo
boon carried aoroaa the dividing lino Of tho two
States. Tho opinion Of NIr. RedAe1d on this
1attor point is in harmony with tho decision Of
the Supreme Court OF tho United States In tho
Daniel Eull case, reported In 10 Wallaco, p. 567.
There ia no constitutional restriction wllatoyor
on tho power Of Congress to control fares md
freight on Interstate railways; and, na thoro is
no such restriction its power to regulate them
cannot fairly ba raiaod.
The argument that such regulation OF faroa
and froights is a violation Of tho provision Of
the Constitution prohibiting tho passage Of q
law impairing tho obligations Of contracts is of
no force whntoyer whom made againBt tho inter-
ference Of Congress. It Inns boon held TINT this
is restriction on tho States only, and docs not
apply to o law passed by Congress-. So that IL
1t wero true tint Government cannot control
tho rates OF faro Of railway wholly situate
within State, which A1r. Rcdncld by means
'oncedos, 1t would not DO truo after 1t engaged
Interstate commerce; for tho reasons TINT
ailways havc no charters to engage III such busi-
q css TINT Congress nlone Gun grant these char
erB; aud that, il thoy do engage In such COM
! ncrco. they, by doing eo subject themselves to
ho unlimited control Of Congress. Such arc
I ho Views Of m able Judge and author, who has
:made the law Of railways specially for lifo-
time. He has pointed out great evil, and
shown tint it can bo constitutionally romodiod
by tho Legislatures Of tho s.atos, or by Con-
gress. Ho thinks Congress tho proper power to
Interfere, md assuros business mon that wo shall
never have successful railway system until 1t,
is brought efficiently under it's control.