National Republican., 1876-01-12
CURRENT CAPITAL TOPICS.
[ ContiaNe5 irem .ir8i plge. ]

not impair the charter contract, because by its
charter there Is no provision giving 1t the excIu-
siye power and right to fix
ITS RATES OF TRANSPORTATION,
and where there is no such specific grant to cor
pofaiion 1t cannot be said that the exercise OF the
right 10 fix freight tariffs by the State IN any
manner affects the rights Of the corporation. A
statute it is said, will not be held invalid By
son Of any repugnaney to tho Constitution, ,un less
such repugBance is clear and undOubtcd. D cor
fics with some specified clause of the CoDs tution
must be shown TO exist beyond all reasonable
doubt, or the law will be sustained. The burden
is cast upon those whoimpugp is validity TO show
precisely where and the panner of Its violation OF
the constitutional restriction. All legislative
power is inherent in the people in their sovereign
capacity. Another power has been delegated In
q complete and unreserved manner 20 the LegIs-
lature, except as restricted by the Federal Con-
stitutioD.
acter, and within the scops of the legitimate
powers of the Legislature; but it is said that If
the charter of the road contained provision pur-
porting to confer upon the company the exclusive
right to establish its rates Of tolls and fares such
a provision would be invalid, because It Is not
competent for Legislature, by contract to dIvsst
itself and future Legislatures OF the power to leg
islate for the public good. 1t holds its power in
trust for the people, and cannot dvest itself OF the
quired by the public good. In suosequ entity nc.
cepting from the State the land granted By the
General Government to aid In the Construction Of
railroads in Iowa the company
EXPRESSLY
that 1t would at all times DO subject to such regu-
lations as the State might enact, and thereby
surrendered any exclusive right IT had previously
possessed to fix its own fares and rates. The
power to amend or repeal all laws creating cornn-
rat1ons is given by the State constitution of 1851
and under this power 1t was competent for the
Legislature to make the law in question. The
branch roads are subject to the operation OF the
law because they accepted the aid towards their
construction under statute expressly providing
that roads accepting such aid should be subject
to Legislative control in regard to their charges
for transportation.
The objection that the law is not uniform in its
operation, 1t is said, is not sustained by showing
that the railroads of the State are divided into
classes, according to their gross earnings. As to
the Objection that ii is regulation of Interstate
commerce, II is said that It is unnecessary to dis
cuss the question as the defendants dlsavow any
attempt to eppy the provisions of the act to inter-
State transportation. Il is, 1t least, IN part
stitutioDal and that a law may stand and be in
part stitutonGl and in part not, has been fire..
Quently held. The road is q foreign corporation,
and it was therefore competent Tor the Lcgisla-
ture to prescribe the terms upon which 1t should
be permitted to transact business in Iowa.
In conclusion, It is said that the idea advanced
that If this law is sustained all railroad property
Will become comparatively valueless, because of
the insecurity Of the Investment and that all ef-
fruitless, is shown to be q sombre flight of the
Imagination by the fact that one half of the $500
miles of railway in Iowa have been constructed
since the constitution Of 1857, authorizing such
legislation.
o. II. Browning and F. T. Frelinghuysen for
appellant and NJ. E. Cults, attorney general for
Iowa, for the State.