The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1882-02-01
Extracts From A Decision Of the
United States Supreme Court.

As we have before said, the right Of
the Legislature to regulate the tariffs Of
has been conclusively set
tied by the highest judicial tribunals Of
the land. No argument is needed on
that point, but we cannot refrain from
reproducing the following germane ex-
tracts from the decision of the United
States Supreme Court pronounced by
Chief Justice Waite, in the case of Ira
Y. Mum and George L. Scott, plaintiffs
in error VS.. The People of the State of
Illinois, in error to the Supreme Court
of Illinois. After asserting the power
of regulation the Court proceeds to state
where it rests:
This brings us up to inquire as to the prin-
eiples upon which this power Of regulation
rests IN order that we may determine what IS
within and what without It's operative effects
Looking, then, to common Law, from whence
come the rights which the Constitution pro-
tee We find that when private property IS
affected with public interest it ceases TO be
iHTisp private only. This was said by Lord Chief
Justice Hale more that 200 years ago in his
treatise, 'fDs POrti5us Adrts," and has been
accepted without objection as an essential
element in the law Of property ever since.
Property does become clothed with public
in crest when used in a manner 10 make It Of
public consequence aud affect the community
at large When, therefore. one deEotes ms
property to use in which the public has an
interest he in effect grants 10 the pubic an
interest in that use and must submit to be
HI fb.a 10 far he
10 the extent Of the interest he has thus erea-
ed. He may withdraw his grant by discon-
iinuing the use but so long he maintains
the use he must submit to the control.
Again:
tits insisted, however that the owner Of the
property is entitled to reasonable compe1sa-
lion for its use even though it be clothed with
a public interest, and that what is reasonable
is judicial and not legislative question: In
countries where the common law prevails, IL
has been Gust omary from time immemorlai for
the Legislature TO declare what shall be rea-
sonable conversation under such cireumstan-
ces; or perhaps more properly speaking 10
FIX a maximum beyond which any charge Z ade
would be made unreasonable Undoubtedly
in mere private contracts relating 10 matters
in which the public has no interest, what Is
reasonable must be ascertaIned judlclally.
Bat this is because the Legislature has no con-
troi over such a contract. SO, too, IN matters
which do affect the public interest, and as TO
which legislative control may be exercised, II
there are no statutory regulations upon the
subject the Courts must determine what IS
/ reasonable. The controlling fact ls the power
] Ia regulateat all. Ii that exists, the right TO
establish the maximum of charge as one OF the
means If regulation Is implied In fact, tue
/ common law rule which requires I he charge to
I be reasonable il itself regulation as to price.
/ without it the owner could MAKE his rates at
viii, and compel the public TO yield to MS
I terms or foregO the use. But mere common
! law regulation Of trade has 10 property, no
vested interest III any rule OF the common law.
! That is only one Of the forms Of municipal law,
and is no more sacred than any Other. Rights
/ Of property which have been created by the
common law cannot be taken away without
/ due process but the law ITSELF as rule OF
conduct. may be changed at the will, or even
at the within, of the Legislature, unless pre-
vented by constitutional limitations. Indeed,
the great office of statutes IS TO remedy detects
[ in the common law as they are developed, and
adapt Il 70 the changes Of time and elrcum-
stances. TO iin.it the rate of charge for sefvl-
ces rendered in public eLsg oyment, or Tor
( the use of properly in which the pueis hes an
/ interest Is oBlv changing regulation which
existed before 1t establishes no new primer
| pc in the law, but only gives a new erect TO
an old one We knoY that this is power
/ which may be abused but that is 10 argument
against It's existence. For protection against
abuses by Legislatures the people must IOsof'
to the polls, not 10 the Courts.
For protection against abuses "the
people must resort to the polls" Mark
that! They have resorted to the polls
in Mississippi as in most of the other
States of the Union, and it is left for the
Legislature to register their decree and
TO embody it in the form of law.