The anti-monopolist. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1874-1878, 1877-03-08

A few years ago when we asserted
that the State had the right to control
and regulate railroad companies, within
its limits, v e were denounced AS q luna
tic or communist.
We have filed whole columns of this
paDer with arguments to prove that
either the people must control the cor
porations or the corporations must con-
troll the people and that, in the nature
of things. free people could not submit
their prosperity, their possessions and
their happiness to the unlimited domi-
nation Of Irresponsible railroad compan
panies and common carriers. That
between the two alternLives Of leaving
the corporations at the mercy Of the
people, or the people at the mercy OF the
corporations, we could not hesitate for
! an instantly
And now comes the Supreme Court Of
the United States, and afirms our j1dg-
ment in every particular. We quote its
decision just made:
The Supreme Court has decided the Sasss
Involving whether ths Legislatures of Mime
lssota, Wisconsin, Illinois and ether Western
States have right to regulate tha carrying q
freight and PASSENGERS on all tllo railroads II
their rsspsctiv- States THE COURT HOL DS
THAT THE STATES HAD 6UsH POWER
UF REGULATION. All the Judges concurrse
except judge Field.
WAsaNarox, March 1.-Folloving are tn
full opinions aud decisions Of the Suprem
Court III th. Granger cases:
Peck ct al. vs.Chicago x Northwestern railroa1
company et A., end Lswrencs vt al vs Pau
And others, and the Chicago 4 Northwestern
railroad company. App-ai from Circ a.
Court for the Western District OF WiscO
| sin.
Tho suits present tbs singular question o
the power Of the legislature Of the stats D
Wisconsin to provide bv Law for tho maximum
charge 70 be made by the Chicago 4 North
western railroad compsny Tor fares and freight
upon transportation Of persons and propsrt
carried within the stats or taken up Outsid
, and brought within il, or taken up inside an
carried ont. The decision that until ccngres
acts in references to tile relations Of inter Stat
.. commerce it is competent for the State to reg
ulats the fares on railroads, so far - they ar
of domestic concern. This company, 1t
said, has domestic relations with the state, an
Incidentally these relations may reach beyon
ths Stale. Until Congress undertakes to legis
late for those who ar1 without, the State
Wisconsin my provide for those within, ey el
} thoughfit may iHdirectiy aff ct thoss without.
!, Affirmed. The Chief Justice delivered th
: opinion.
/ The Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroa
W the Attorney General ami rtste Treas
. / nrsr. An appeal from The Iowa Circuit.
In this case it is said the railroad companis
are clrriers fr hire. They are incorporate
J powers i'm order that they may the better scry
J tn public in that capacity They are, there
D fore, engaged IN public employment, edectin
/ | public interest, and under the decision in ii
case OF Mum u > aptt vs. the people Of ltIn0i
ths principal case, subject to Legislative con
troll as to the rates Of fars and freight, unle.
Y protected by their charters In the absence
) | legislative regulation on the subject Of fare
il th- court must decide fUr IL, ~ they do IL
!. private parsons when controversies aris4
what is reasonable. Bnt when the LsgislatuI
, steps in and prescribes the maximum
> charge it uperatvs upon this corporation Il
J. same as it does upon individuals ENGAGED
: similar business. uniform TAse OF cisnrues I.
!, alI railroad companies might operate unjust
upon some II was pTop-r, therefore, TO pr,
Q vide some way Tor ttis adaptation of the rates
the circuUstAf ces OF ths different roads and II
]. Lsgiziatnrr, ID tn 4 exercise of To power. h
j seen TT - do this by asystSm Of clrssifieaiin
! and whether this WAS the best that could
done Ii not for ths court to decide 1855
Affirmed. The Chief Justics delivered Il
! opinion.
II !. 49,