The daily Argus., 1874-03-02
Monday, March Q, 1874.
Redheld on RailwaYs

lowed to pursue the unrestrained course
now entered upon by them, the expenses
Of transportation will ultimately absorb all
the profits Of interstate trade and manu-
facture." This is startling assertion,
coming as it does from one whose familiar
ity with the working Of our railway system
is unauestioned since there is scarcely what
lawyers call railroad case" the facts of
which he is not familiar with, having made
Railway Law speciality, as he says HIM
self, for almost the period of the life OF
generation" and having written standard
work on the subject. Yet, Mr.. Redheld,
with all his opportunities to form correct
Judgment in the premises, puts this result
down as entirely certain" He says,
moreover, that railways are entirely be-
yond all healthy competition; that what
ever competition there is among them cen
tres in few important points, to which
freights and fares are merely nominal that
the profits lost at those points to the roads
are assessed upon way-transportation
where there is no competition. He agrees
with the Westminster ReUie,o that the
talk about the competition OF railways is
loose, inconsistent verbiage, and irration-
al cant" and asserts that there are facts
relating to the management of railroads,
and the charging of fare and freight by
them, which, if properly collected and pre-
sented, would set the whole country in a
blaze. He mentioned one instance in
New England, known to himself, where
the charges for transportation ARE made,
by some device, to double the advertised
rates, and thus render the products value
less to the consumer as well as to the pro-
ducer," He says that the rates are some
times fourfold the charge for transporta-
ton of the same commodities ten or even
twenty times as far, in the same direction
and over the same lines, and that the un-
dercharge in one instance covers the over
charge in the other These words are ia
ken almost verbatim from Mr. .Red6eld's S
article and we feel very certain that the
former Chief-Justice of the Supreme Court
Of Vermont did not pen them to excite the
ill.will of the community against railway
corporations, but to call attention to great
and growing evil, and show the necessity of
some appliance to remedy it, But to what
extent may the State Legislatures or Con-
gress interfere in the matter? Mr.. Red
field is supposed to know some little law,
and we will let him answer
All railways may be divided into two
classes /. State railways, or railways ~
ing wholly within single State. p Inter
State railways or railways lying partly in
one State and partly in another. Has the
Legislature of State within which u rail
way wholly lies the power to regulate its
treights and fares? 1t plainly has where
it has reserved to itself that power But
how is it when the Legislature of the
State has not reserved that power tC
itself? Can it, in this latter case regulate
the freight or fare charged by a railroad
IL. :.
of the Constitution Of the United States
which declares that no State shall pass a
law impairing the obligation of contracts.
Chief Justice Redfeld is Of opinion that it
may; for the reason that, spite of its char
ter, the railway company is only common
carrier, and that the common law applica-
BILE to common carriers is also applicable to
them. They undertake, no matter what
their charter, like all other common cal
riers, TO carry fol reasonable compensa-
ton, and to make no unreasonable or un.
just discrimination among those who de-
sire to employ them. This is the common
law which all who become common carrier.
whether railway corporations or not, are
bound by. This is as much part of then
charters as if inserted in them. Violating
this, they violate their charters, and the
State is warranted in interfering. 1t will
be seen that Mr. Redfield does not ques.
ton the yarmouth College decision, but
holds that the principle there laid down i,
modified in the case of railway corpora
tions by another equally unde1iable, viz
that railway corporations, as common car
riers, can demand only reasonable compen,
sation, and make no unjust discrimination
among those who employ them. rRed-
field quotes some eight or nine cases il
which this principle has been affirmed Il
is clear, thea. that, 50 far as Il railway lie,
within State, it may be regulated as {,
its tolls, its fares, and frcIghts by the
State.
And how as to Interstate railways
Judge Redfeld shows that so tar as these
are concerned, Congress, although it does
not exercise it, has, under the COnstitu.
tiOn, the power TO regulate them The in
dividual States have the power to charter,
build, or control railways only within their
own limits When "a railway leaves the
State in which it originates, it ceases to
owe allegiance to it. Into q neighboring
State, it cannot, even as corporation, car
ry one OF its franchises. This doctrine has
been held to be the law by all American
Courts. A corporation may, Of course
transact business in a State other than
that in which it was Incorporated, but only
subject to the laws Of the State into which
it has entered. Such being the condition o
our law in regard to corporations
whether railway or other, it may
be asked How are we going t
regulate the fare and freight charges o
Interstate railways? There are only twC
ways of doing it. Either Congress mus
do it, or the forty Independent State Legis
latures must agree on a system of inter
State commercial intercourse. Congress
is vested by the Constitution with unlimit
ed powers over commerce among tn,
States; and this power is exclusive o
the power Of the States upon the subject
Now, the regulation of commerce between
the States, as has been decided by tht
courts, includes the regulation of the means
by which it is carried on, whether mean
Of navigation or passage over land, whel
such passage is necessary to the CONNER
cial intercourse of the States-whethe
rivers, the ocean,or railroads. The enact
ments of Congress can reach everything
affecting the conduct of business of through
trains upon Interstate railways. FAR
and freight upon such railways are, accord
ing to Mr.. Redfeld, wholly under the con
troll Of Congress; and this control begin
from the moment that goods or persons
destined to be carried across State lines ar
taken in charge by the railway company
and not merely when they have been car
ried across the dividing hnekof the tw,
States. The opinion of Mr.. Redfeld OF
this latter point is in harmony with tn,
decision of the Supreme Court of the Unit
ed States in the Daniel Bull case reported