New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-01-21


That State LEGISLATURE may ao'ho1, corps
ration to taGe land for the c~nsuuup o.
owner What else does this doctrine mem.
II not. that building railroad though II Dc bun, ny
the why for public use il that such road ss
highway. whether made BY the Government Itself orsy
MN oy mn po ~ wnls Sc ncs a re ,ho nnmersus
iecisious this effect which have been made Ia The
state Courts We may however refer to TWO or ,hrre.
wSShr h. use o. public edv,'e d,p.nl.h
b.. ever eS mpor,nee tina. the r',d
. S.., ., b ~ aels1 pcrora,i ousb
slip , a' sSSif o., 30 ,n iE Sas sr. o. b. ~.
pane. regarded pHs j4r,1 lss rss, 20 e',s' ol' .
s''aT nav %Sf b. p,s mp,a %. n. sens,s ,.
Tie public ge h worA the manner ~ "'cH ss ~ ei
b'' 20 bsrnl gpoa The se, On ss.
stS TIE Leg s,ar, !, ,hs sierS,s Jaas'
And m ine -aIne ease the Cur a ,s s,,,, y,
be defined II, tolls for tpaporsicn nay he hn'ei
c ATn snS" am"nS the acs wh ss
can make concerning that whch Is sonp,eIet ,tres
il follows that since the iaor MAJ DE- resniaod % ns
| nng tolls and rates for transportation, 80 may We
OF railroad operating IN Dnt one stare anu e"SSa,
local commerce only, should De he!d su'Deet 10 est
atiye control IN respect 10 ~ eh,fEr1 mn.
| through line cro'siag the hri"or' % m..
| states. and largely engaged ~ eo apI11nH
vast and dangerous monopoly should Dg hcid iIe9 ,os
such control Aud yet such j. ne lneF rOnstluh.e
| a
| upon Interstate lines, while granting to ih1 o.aNs
power limit such charges upon hne' ~ ,rc sa1 ~
state law il. IS Judge Rodhold vel say- simply I'm
possible" Tor the PLAIN reason thar to a"' 81 49,
| can have no eNIaterrtoilli force "h'oNo' "'"'.
| on Railways. Vol. !. page 722D a, .,.,,.
Ia the case OF the state freight tar, already cea
tins r. port the Court held that upon the ton OF
freight carried STATE 10 another was rcguia
ZION of among the states therefore thai
n" ststo can law or collect sucn a tax In delivering
| opinion OF the Court, Mr. Justice strong -aid
Then tai uDoa hesb' snaPorei from sat, % snea
regulation Of ae transportation ina therefore r-x,h o. cen.
mere .,ny ssi oo pc1b1E rule iof 90, r,l,.ost
~ Which ne 80 be controlled bosuS zoe 'n.5', ~ &
tie state and N ,skins thrm on an any one @ .
| ,url comrnerr, :, 10 prescribe .ueI rule -,
The urop.,itIon that TO hx reasonable rates for The
government OF persons engaged IN carry ihg on cOh
mercc IL legitimate exercise OF the power 10 rghAs
such commerce Will appear sim more clearly, when We
CON drr ths al common law. u violation 0i The
Obligation OF "a common Garner to charge uhr"'phaDs
or compensation for the diacbhfs" Oh any OF
! his duties. il advocates. IN recent argumeat
against the validity of the Illinois Ia,
Upon '5s c .His su0 SHd Alton Rrold COMPANY
that carriers. acting under charter OF WIN
out one are alike liable for any abuse 81 tht P'Dh
| heir charges (see argument Of Mr. Beckwiih IN Re
port Illinois Commissioners for lo'2( Ana me auDs1
rites fuilS sustain thI- PopoSton' @ ~, ~ =.
ana pas,ongcrs, who ,ct themselves before te punc "a
ready TO carry for all who apply, become KIND OF pub
lie officer. and owe 10 inc PUBIC E,h'rd u''' r.
pcHdenf OF any contract ~ me particular Sasa
trid on Carriers and Railroads, Sec 5!D Ia lhofl AT
H. GO. vermont 1901, the supreme Court oi ihat ''a'
| says; ,-,,.... -, 49, S,... b. w,i.h n,r.o,.
,u porr.y ar ecr restraints AND urn' u ori,r
scar' e gsn.. G'e' health aIa Pp, 81 so ever az .
gos scsno.asgrd general PRINCIPLES een far a,
rp,e sni sru ihr 10 he ~ REGARD % fa~Ss
| ,h,0i be aaie 'r1e7' question
The right Of eminent domain i, attribute Of SOW
erclznty belongs 10 the states undoubtedly Tor al
legitimate purposes; that - 20 say Tor any Iiposr dnor
| eminent also, and may he exercised 10y II whenever
neodi TO me complete imd ~ nof of .se,
a Tort arsenal lighthouse, custom ,ho"s5 81, "
o,tolEcc within any one OF the State. II the Stas
nullu re
| private owner should refuse to sell and convey tAe
necessary land the purpose This whole question
bas RECENTLY been con ierrd by the supreme Court Of
| Michigan, IN the case OF Trombey agi. humphrey:
Auditor General OBJ Michigan, an An elaborate ana
exhaustive opinion delivered IN that case Dy one OIL
the abo,, uIi-t the country Judge tooleyJ ana Nc
content ourselves with referring 10 II ahg auo.n' 'r"
II the conclusion reached by the court a. follows
Iae lie a,,Gp bi P. . OF oyer sa iu which Is no'.
and operate, without It or hsierh9ce from Le oie an VIM.
90 ,ct1 for Tie permission Of the other Il the
,g,rn.n 5holy foreign to Zach other instead Of being e'A
r. has been insisted that Congress cannot regulats
interstate commerce when carried on ny rMt'id Dc-
cause railroads themselves are chartered Dy ths
hut the answer il obvious Congress docs not inerere
commerce II this distinction kept IN uInd the difh
| Guilty suggested must disappear. IL cannot Tor mo
amInS nv b,ny incorpor.trd m the several states
through which they carry their operations Inc
night O Congress 10 regulate such commerce cannot Dc
rrdc 70 eDend upOn the CORPORATE character OF tho
| agent, b. which suca commerce j. carried on. lae
ghi OF STATE Ia general TO control all Corporations OF
public character which 1t creates Is not qdesuOied'
bt mat this rht be carried To the extent OF GRE
aung corporation. and Authorizing OF permitting IL 10
| engage IN Interstate Commerce and By mat means
taking that cut G. the control al congress-
emphatcaly denied The power 81 w, star 10 'onoi
| It's corporations must DO exercised "itn refer.
| cnce 20 those subjects which the s'aie
has Jurisdiction. and 10 such contracts, transact ms and
cngagcmont, are subject 10 be regulated ana con
tro.icd ~ state law. 1nose insist that tue cor
poratc existence ana character OF the railroad con pa
mes OF tnr country nsuprraDe barrier TO Congrts
|
ston that states BY charteTns companies for car
rying Interstate commerce can deprive tongess
Of it, constitutional powers N the premises. That stsa
position y wholly unieuaOle is clear ihe power VI
Congress reguaCe commerce exists Independently OF
the means sg 'ncIeS 10y which that commerce j. car
RED Steamboat companies engaged IN The naNlgA
ton 81 our great l'cfS are heluchtH hnh We 80
generally Incorporated under STATE laws, but II mas
never urged that Tor th reason the commerce car
red on by these companies be! ond the cOhioi 81 'op
1nr QUESTION OF EyPLDIE>cr.
| There are already in the United states over COCOA
miles Of railway and the system j. yet IN it, Infancy
The commerce carried by This means IL vast and rap
idly increasing II il to DE presumed that no one Will
claim that all this Immense commerce ought u remain
n,,,,aneuty EXEMPT from legislative control rcguA
non ifthcrc could he doubt upon this subject, tho
| most casual invest cation would remove H. Inc rates
charged railroad transportation are. as rule, tue
result OF combination such thiuS honest cometl-
ZION being systematically avoided. Upon this subject.
nycr~5 of,re a committee OF the Massachusetts Legs
iaturc has the facts forciby that We quote ~
| follows; . ...,.,
Now what y 1h tl,e as aezsl' 90 "a, : ,t .pbei.
George Stevenson, eoppeson Impossible lie .n DING
enable competition TO er' the preseu o. 's
too Numerous Look ebroV h couns snd cu s'
gllcr .hss competition smSunt TO- 50 lar ~ f'o,', m 10.
urd TAX pray the case Of Nv toA aHa 'Aaso 40 e
.boussna apart between Nhch RAILROADS. have o-l
ON t that changed bSeea New iG,s
and Chicago established by comluuoE lou sn"N 'As
meet conyeuon and sh.y deete aoN NJ IN
upon ali W roads on siy-n day lou o,