The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1878-04-03

protected By their charters, subject 70 iegis-
Iative control to their rates OF rare anu
freight
y The Burlington and Missouri River
Railroad Company has. within the scope OF
tile authority con erred by It's charter, ana
subject TO the limitations thereby tmpos"u j.
the power OF a natural person 10 MAXI Cnt'-
trac l., reference to is business Like
such person, it OF lis assigner. the tlalntn
in error is, under the same circumstances.
subject at all times TO such laws as TIE Geh-
eral Assem- bly, of the State may from time
TO tune enact.
The court say in that case. page. IoL, III
giving the opinion:
s.They 1.-THE company are therefore en-
gagged in public employment affecting The
public interrst: aud. under the decision IN
Mum W.. Illinois. a OTTO ll3 subject 10
legislative control. as t. their rates OF iare
aud freight, uHless protected by their charter
The next decision Of the Supr me Court
of the United States 10 which L Gail at1en-
ton was mad at the present term, and l.
not vet published, the case OF ohIelds VS.
Ohio-for the statement al which L avail
myself OF the analysis presented here the
other day by the Senaf or from Illinois:
That doctriue'--peaAiug OF the doctrine
/ in eases which have bean rca.!-'waS dur
! ing the same term applied o eases arising n
Iowa. Illinois aud Minnesota. and at the
present term To a case ia Ohio. Shields vs.
| Ohio, involved the following facts: The
! Constitution OF Ohio. which took effect IN
/ September, 1891, ordained Indt no Sptclal
| privileges shall ever be grated that may
! not be alLerei revoked, or repealed by the
General Assembly, (Articlr |. sec5ion p
! The General Assem- bly, shall pas no p clal
act comforting corporate powers (ArtIcie
/ l3 section L. Corporations may BE- fOrmtd
under general law :, but such general laws
NAV from time 10 time be al'e cred or repe al
| ed. (Article - section ? railway com
pany was prior 10 that date Incorporated
/ under a charter which fixed no limitations
80 tasR ira ono RI Inn n
persons
I'm 1856 the Legislature passed general
law authorizing. upon ceri ain terms and
conditions, the consolidation of railway
! com panies. Several corporations, inc udlng
/ the one so operating under a Speci ii char
| ter granted before tin adoption OF the Con-
| sLitution, awaited themselves of the pr vi
/ sions of that act and form ID a G nsOlidattd
| COMPANY An act of the General Assem- bl
| of 1870 limited the charges for passen% ers to
| three cents per mile and the court held chat
| this Limitation could be imposed without
| imparing the obligation of a contract, not
withs anding the absence OF any provision
/ in the charter OF one OF the com panies re-
! serving to the Legislature any control over
| fares and freights. The reasoning of the
| court is that by consolidating under this
| act, the respective companies accepted it
| with all its conditions and restrictions, and
among them was the liability of the consoli-
dated com pany 10 be dealt with by the Cen
eral Assembly of Ohio in the exercise of the
power reserved to it under the Constitution
of the State.
| Now, Mr.. President. il is quite manifest,
| from the fl ST three cases | have cited from
| the fourth Otto, and the case of Shields vs.
Ohio, not yet published. that the Supreme
Court of the United States, in deciding what
the Legislative power may do, under the ex-
press and Unrestricted power of amendment
and repeal, have not, aS the Senator from
Ohio did, attem pied to stop half way down
but that they. in effect, hold, as | have en-
| deavOred to show must be the result upon
| principle, that, no matter how express any
| provision OF IA charter or contract may be
! or however advantageous to the company
| the Legislature may, in their discretion,
| whenever they think it right amend or re-
| peal it: the only Limitation being that such
| repeal cannot affect rights so vested as no
| longer to need the direct support of the
contract, As such. Those which do not need
the direct support of the contract to sustain
them, and stand upon that alone with no
| superadded right, il they can be said 10 be
vested at all, under a charter reSerVing the
unrestricted power of amendment and re-
peal, are only vested subject to the exercise
| of that power, the primary condition OF
| their existence.
The reader will determine for himself
what light, if any, is shed by these cita-
tions and reasonings upon the questions
which have engaged the attention of our
Legislature. But they will all concur
genius of our institutions and the sp irit
of Justice that would animate our legis-
latOrs and pervade our laws, are the re-
marks of Senator Morgan, of Alabama,
who said Congress had power to alter,
amend or repeal the Pacific Railroad acts,
and these companies must be controlled
by the legislative authority Of the gov
eminent. He referred to the great
amount of capital of these companies,
and said they employed thousands of
persons, all controlled by few directors.
There were kingdoms in the world the
rulers of which had less power than
some of these railroad officials. 1t was
for the good of the public that Congress
should exercise its constitutional power
over these corporations, the creatures of
| its will If Congress had no such power,
| then it would require but few more gil
gantio corporations to be incorporated to
absorb all the powers of Congress, leave
the government stranded and the people
at the mercy of these corporations. He
argued that if Congress had the power
to make corporations it had the power to
unmake them" This is the ring of the
true metal. The declarations of the able
Senator from Alabama are true. What
impartial and just government should
respect is equal rights, not "vested
rights" As Democratic contemporary
well expresses the idea, "the doctrine Of
posted rights seems to require a new
Interpretation and definition. As held
by chartered monopolies, it means the
undisturbed enjoyment of any and all
special privileges Congresses, Legislatures
or municipal councils can be wheedled or
bribed into granting. If legislative
body may grant privileges which it can
never recall; if it may grant chartered
| prerogatives to a corporation which ii
can never alter, amend or repeal, what is
there to prevent it from granting all the
public lands, all the public revenues
nay, all the sovereign rights of the people
in perpetuity to corporation? 1t is a
principle of Anglo Saxon law that man
cannot sell himself into slavery. But
some interpretations of the doctrine OF
vested rights would make it possible for
Congress or Legislature to sell whole
people into slavery, by yielding irrevoca-
bic franchises to corporations Vested
rights are entitled to respect. Charters
granted for purposes of public good
ought no. to be fiippantly disturbeb