The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1882-04-12

the subject First, has Congress a superyi-
sorry and restraining power over said roads,
so far as interstate commerce is concerned
Secondly, if it has this power, to what
extent should it be embodied in legislation
| THE POWER OF CONGRESS.
To determine this question it is only
necessary to quote the language Of the Con-
stitution of the United States and refer to
some decisions interpreting said language.
Article l, section s, clause 3 Of the Con-
stitution reads as follows
Congress shall have power to regulate COM
merce with foreign nations, and among the sew
eral States and with the Indian tribes.
Section s, clause IS, confers upon Con-
gress the further power
To make all laws which shall be necessary
! and proper for carrying into execution the fore
going powers, etc.
Nothing can be clearer than that the
power TO regulate the interstate commerce
belongs exclusively to Congress, and the
power to legisate for its protection and
encouragement is equally clear.
| 1t will be readily conceded and no argu-
ment is necessary to establish the fact, that
where the termini of any railroad lie within
any one State, and the road is used only for
! local purposes, freights transported thereon
not passing into another State, the Lsgisla-
ture Of the State in which such road lies
has exclusive jurisdiction of all matters con-
nected with it. But when the termni are
in different States, or where the road Is
used as part of line over which freights
pass from one State to another, then the
| jurisdiction of Congress attaches.
The trainers of the Constitution well
knew that States, as individuals, have their
| ieal0usies and predictions, ana that these
| feelings would show themselves in acts of
| legislation, provoking retaliation which
would greatly embarrass the commerce
carried on between them. This embarrass-
ment was felt under the articles of conted-
Grafton, and, among other causes, led to the
adoption of the present Constitution. That
learned commentator upon the Constitution,
ChieEJustice Story, uses the following
language
The want of this power Ito regulate COM
merce) was one of the leading defects of the
confederation, and probably, much as any
one cause, coaduced to the establishment OF the
Constitution. 1t IS power
vital to the prosperity of the Union and with
out it the Government would scarcely deserve
soon sink into discradit and imbeeility. 1t
would stand as a mere shadow of sovereignty
to mock our hopes and involve US in q common
ruin > Indeed without this power
to regulate commerce among the States, the
power OF regulating foreign commerce would
be incomplete and Intellectual.
The want of uniformity in the regulations of
commerce was source of perpetual strife and
dissatisfaction of inequalities and riyalries. and
retaliations among the States.
fiat the time Judge Story penned this
language this power in Congress was felt to
be necessary and proper for the protection
Of interstate commerce, how much more
pressing the need to-day
Commerce is now being conducted largely
by means of railroads, which have super
seeded the old time common carriers. Com
petition is well-nigh destroyed, and grand
monopoly has risen upon its ruins. The
turnpike is no longer available except for
local purposes, The canal-boat travels too
slowly for this fast age, our rivers are mac
cessible to a large portion of our popula-
ton, and railroads have become & necessity
to the commerce of our rapidly expanding
country.
The hope was long cherished by those who
suffered at the hands Of these roads from
undue determinations, and other improper
acts that competition among themselves
would bring the corrective, but the history
of these institutions has demon strated the
folly of such hope. The process Of pooling
their freights, of agreeing upon a minimum
tariff of rates, and other practices common
to these corporations have shown that they
work together to build themselves up at the
expense of the public.
1t must be clear to every mind, therefore,
that railroad competition among themselves
will afford no adequate protection to the
public against extortion and mismanage-
ment. Other means must be resorted to
having restraining influence upon them
Congress ought and must interp0se in be-
half of the people. Its power is ample, az
shown by reference to the following de-
cisions: Gibbons vs.. Ogden, 8 Wheaton,
], ,227, ,229; Brown VS.. Maryland, II d., 4i9-
446; The City of New York vs.. Min, ii
Peters, 102-I57; Grover Us. Slaughter, Is
ID 1851; Welton VS.. State of Missouri,
Otto, 275-230: The Daniel Ball, 10 Wal
lace, 557 The State Freight Tax, Is d.,
232-275; The Railroad Company v. Rich
mond, 19 i'd, 584; The Granger Cases, 4
Otto, II3 ct seq, pages 155, 164, 180: Han
nibal and Saint Joseph Railroad Company
vs.. Chicago Legal News, February :, 1878.
Upon an examination of these cases it will
be found that every feature of the subject
has been scanned and judgment pronounced
upon each.
HOW FAR SHOULD CONGRESS LEGIsLATE
UPON THE SUBJECT.
Unquestionably to the extent of properly
regulating and protecting interstate com
meree, of guarding Individual citizens
against unjust Determinations and exac-
tions in the matterof freight transportation,
and the general public against immoral
practices.
The absence of Congressional legislation
defining the powers and duties of railroads
as common carriers in connection With in
terstate commerce, seems to have induced the
opinion on their part that if Congress ever
possessed power that it had lost it By l0n-stser,
or had determined to waive it indefinitely,
and that they had right to become "a law
unto themselves upon this subject, and as
their accumnIations increased and the pub
lie became more patient and submissive they
could venture to become more aggressive,
gTo BE CONTINUED,