The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1877-03-07
STATE SENTINEL, WEDNESDAY MORNING. MARCH T. 1877

is that until congress acts in reference to
the relat ons of interstate commerce it is
competent for the state to regulate the fares
of railroads so far as they are of domestic
concern. This company 1t is said has
domestic relations with the state
and incidentally these relations may
reach beyond the state Until congress
undertakes to legislate for those who are
without the state, Wisconsin may provide
for those within even though it may indi-
rectly affect those without. Affirmed.
The chief justice delivered the opinion.
The Chicago, Burlington and Quincy rail
roa company VS.. the attorney gen.
An appeal from the Iowa
circuit. In this case it is said railroad COM
panies are carriers for hire. They are in
corporated powers in order that they nay
better serve the public in that
capacity; they are therefore engaged
in public employment affecting pub
lie interests, and under the decision
in Mum 4 Scott VS. the People of Illinois,
the principal case is subject to legislative
control as to their rates of fare and freight
unless protected by their charters. In the
absence of legislative regulation on the sub
ject OF fares, the courts must decide
for it as they do for private persons
when controversies arise what is reasonable,
but when the legislature steps in and pre-
scribes the maximum of charge it operates
upon this company the same as it does upon
individuals engaged in similar business.
uniform rate of charges for all railroad COM
panies in the state might operate unjustly
upon some. 1t was proper that, therefore, to
provide in the same way for the adaptation
of rates the circumstances of the different
roads, and the legislature in the exercise of
its discretion has seen fit TO do this by a
system of classification and whether this
was the best that could be done, is not for
the court to decide Affirmed. The chief
justice delivered the opinion.
The Chicago, Milwaukee and st. Paul rail
ad company VS.. Ackley ct al. Error TO
circuit court for Wisconsin,. The only
question presented in this case
is whether the railroad company in
Wisconsin can recover for transportation of
property more than the maximum fixed by
the state by showing that the amount
charged was no more than reasonable COM
pensation for the services rendered. The
decision that as between the company and
the freighter the maximum of the statute
is limit of the recover
ing for transportation actually performed:
il the companyshould refuse to carry at the
prices fixed and an attempt should be made
to forfeit its charter on that account, other
questions might arise which will not be an
ticipated at this time. For goods actually
carried the limit of the statute is the limit
of recovery. Affirmed. The chief justice
delivered the opinion.
Stowefvs the state of Wisconsin. Error
to the circuit court of Wisconsin. The only
question in this case not decided in the
case of the Chicago, Milwaukee and St Paul
railroad company VS.. Ackley, just de-
cided is as to the effect upon the
rights of those parties of the
charter of the Milwaukee and Waukesha
railroad company passed by the territorial
legislature of Wisconsin in 1S47. This pro-
xyiH thot ha anunpIotfOp Of
or any portion of the track not less than
- miles il shall be lawful for
the company to demand and receive
such sum or sums OF money for
passage and freight of persons and
property as they shall from time to time
the company the charter right to fix its
own rates of fare and freight subject
only TO judicial determination as TO
whether they are reasonable. The
court affirmed the view of the supreme
court of the state on this question that the
charter was acce pied. and the company was
organized many months after the adoption
OF the constitution and the admission of the
state into the Union by congress. Previous
to that time II remained naked proposition.
For this reason il is held that its acceptance
after the organization Of the state, 30 far
as ii Is contract, makes ii manifestly con-
tract with the state. Affirmed. The chief
justice delivered the opinion; The Winona
and st. Peter railroad company VS.. Blake
et al. Error to supreme court of Minnesota;
and No. "a, McGrath, receiver, VS.. Coleman.
Error TO circuit court for the
district of Minnesota In the
former case II is said that the road was by
its charter bound TO carry when called upon
as a common carrier, and charge only rea-
sonable rates; these are incidents of occupa-
tign in which II was authorized to engage.
The case Is held TO fall within the de-
cision decided at the same time, and
stated above In number ~ II
is held the question is the same, and the de-
cision is the same in both cases. The chief
justice delivered the opinion. Justice
Field dissented In all the granger cases and
with the permission of the court will here
after file an opinion.