Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1881-08-15


We stated in yesterdays issue, as
briefly as our limited space would allow,
one or two of the reasons which con-
strained US to dissent from the first of the
six advisory recommendations OF the
Railroad Commissioners to the General
Assembly as to what legislation is neces-
sary to complete the railroad legislation
of the State. We come now to the sec
ond one OF these six recommendations,
which appears to us to be even more
Objectionable than the first, inasmuCh as
its adoption will, in our view of it, lead
to consequences far more sweeping and
disastrous in its effects, both upon the
interests of the roads and the people Of
the State.
In this section the Commission recon-
mend the repeal of the provisO to section
of the act of 1879, creating the Com
mission and defining their powers, rights
and duties, and to give them the power
to control and regulate rates of through
freights (which comes from or goes be-
yond the boundary of the State. In
other words, they ask the General AS
sembly to invest them with full power
to control and regulate commerce be-
tween the States, in contravention of
section 8, article 1, of the Constitution of
the United States, which cOnfers on
Congress the exclusive power Ito regu-
late commerce with foreign nations, and
among the several States and with the
Indian tribes.
The reasons given by the Commission
why such proposed action would not be
in conflict with this section of the Fed
eral Constitution, are not TO our mind
very satisfactory, nor, in truth, very
clear. Congress, they say, ''has never
exercised its power in this regard. There
is no United States law on the subject to
be contravened. But if there were, the
proposed action would accord with it,
not oppose it. Doubtless it might, had
the Commission the same power to die
tate a course of legislation to Congress
on the subject, as they now attempt to
do to the General Assembly of Georgia.
In no other way do we see how this pro-
posed action of the Georgia Legislature
can be made prospectively to harmonic
with an act of Congress not yet in exist
ence, and never heretofore proposed or
discussed.
But to our mind this clause in the
Federal Constitution is too clear for argu-
ment. The State Convention of 1877,
when the subject was before them, de
bated the matter fully and thoroughly,
viz: the right of tie State to regulate or
interfere with through freights, and it
was conceded that the State could not
exercise such a power, because of the
above constitutional inhibition. The
Legislature of 1879, while the present
railroad law was pending before them,
thoroughly cauvassed the question, and
the introduction of this proviso to Sec
ton of the act was the result of their
deliberations. This proviso, the present
Commission, having upon it only one
lawyer, and whose abilities as such have,
never to our knowledge, been widely
conceded or very cOnspicuously display
ed, now gravely recommend the Legisla-
ture to repeal and to invest them with an
unconstitutional power to increase their
already high authority.
The fashion of this world soon passeth
away.
There is nothing to which mankind
in general habituate themselves so readi-
", and learn to love and to WELD as the
exercise OF high and arbitrary power
1t occurs to us just here, that this same
Commission in their first report to the
Executive spoke of their powers as so
large and even arbitrary that they shrank
from their full exercise. Now they are
clamoring for additional and more ex.
tensive power, and are even willing to
run tilt with the Supreme law of the
land to obtain them.