Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1882-10-04
1anrestr. tu.rlllQet,rs:
WEDNESDAY EVENING, OCT. 4, 1854.
A Welcome Decision.

cred by Judge Turnkey, which decides
that a railroad company cannot decline
tohonor a ticket which it has sold, al
though it has not been bought by the
holder directly from them, but has been
purchased at second hand" A Penn.
sylvania railroad company's train con-
ductor refused to receive such ticket
offered bya passenger going from New
York to Philadelphia and he brought
suit against the company. The supreme
court decides that the ticket was valid
in his hands and reverses the judgment
Of the lower court, which was in favor
Of the company. This decision is said
to be the first one given by the supreme
court against the Pennsylvania railroad
company for number Of years, and it is
a fact which has excited much notice
that this company has been so generally
fortunate in its appeals to our highest
court. There is cause for satisfaction in
finding that the supreme court is not
always, at least, blinded in its judgment
by the magnitude Of the great corpora
tion which appears before it as suitor :;
yet this is but part of the qualification
which this decision affords the people,
who have never understood the public
necessity which led the Legislature of
the state to enact that a sale of rail-
road ticket by any other than an author
lied agent of the company should he IN
lawful and he punishable by fine and
imprisonment. The act Of 1878, to this
effect, was passed to protect railroad
companies from sO-called "scalpers"
who are persons who buy and
sell railroad passage tickets from
those who have no further use
for them. The corporations complained
that tickets which they sold for long
distances at low rates were thus put into
the hands of travellers to use for short
distances, ut less than the regular fare
the original purchasers using the tickets
as far as they travelled, and selling the
remaining coupons to scalpers to be dis
posed of to those who desired to travel
over the remainder of the route. There
is manifestly nothing essentially wrong
or criminal in this. 1t was perfectly
lawful by the common law. The Legis-
lature has chosen to come to the aid of
the railroads by declaring the business
of scalpers to he criminal. The courts
have sustained the authority of the Leg
islature to pass such 4 law and this
latest decision of the supreme court does
not deny it. The general judgment,
however, is that it is an unjust law.
There is no sufficient reason why rail
road ticket should not be dealt in as
commodity just as any other merchan-
disc. We know of nothing else that 4
man has right to buy which it is made
unlawful for him to sell in whole or in
part. Even though railroad companies
could not protect themselves from injury
by the resale of their tickets by others,
the Legislature could not justly come to
their relief. In this case, however, they
are amply able to take care of them
selves. They have but to redeem their
unused tickets, to take away the
scalpers business; and if they sell
tickets for long distances at prices
very much lower than for short dis
tances, they perpetrate an injustice and
an injury to the people, for which the
latter may properly demand redress
from the lawmakers. 1t is the railroad
company's officers who do this public
wrong, who should be punished by fine
and imprisonment, and not those who
seek to re sell tue tickets the company has
sold and got the money for. The de-
mand of the people now is for rates of
fare and freight by railroad corporations
that shall be in proportion to tie dis
tance Travelled and it is a fair demand,
which if it was accedled to, would at
once put an end to the scalpers' busi-
ness and remedy the wrong upon which
that business is founded.
The present decision Of the supreme
court leaves the scalpers' business un
lawful rs the Legislature has decreed it
to be but it declares that the purchase
Of a ticket from the scalpels is a lawful
act, not having heen forbidden 'sy the
law. Therefore, The companies must
accept the tickets offered them by the
purchasers. If the ticket was bought in
New York it was lawful sale even hy
the scalper, who is not amenable
there to the Pennsylvania statute. Con-
tracts, by well-known principle os law,
valid where made, are valid everywhere.
But even if the ticket had been bought
in Pennsylvania its unlawful sale there is
decided not to damage the validity of
the ticket. The railroad company may
secure the punishment Of the person who
sold it, but it cannot punish the one
who bought it, who is not declared by
the law to have committed an otfense in
so doing; nor can it avoid the ticket |
in his hands, which has been reg
ularly issued by it and is good
in the hands of the holder. No
other decision could apparently have
been rendered, and it is difficult to |
see how the lower court could have
decided otherwise. The supreme courtc
Of Pennsylvania would not stultify
itself even for the great corporation
that made the demand; and soon
we hope Il Pennsylvania Legislature
will he found sound enough to meet the
righteous demand that its people shall
not be charged greater price per mile !!
of travel than the citizens of other states
who cross H. on tho xyav lu,f,voo,, 1l,,