New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-05-16

|
RlILEO4DS And STATE REG TLATI6NN.
| 4 week ago the supreme Court rendered a
very important decision. Perhaps 10 other
| decision ever given has affected the value OF 50
| large an amount Of property, or closed the door
! against 50 many cOutroN eYsics, existing and
! prospective and yet The opinion III the case OF
! Rugeles versus The State of Illinois attracted
comparatively little attention. Il is curious
! illustration Of the modes by which laW-ab,d-
| jng neoule governs itself that this case origin
| atcd in a controversy about exactly two cents.
! Yet its decision affects the value of stocks and
| bonds representing nominal value Of oven
$4,000, 5000 1t determines the powers
which stockholders have, through tLeir di-
rectoIs in fixing the rates charged for railway
transportation, aud affects the measure of Sc
curity which b0nlhuldeIs have through mort
cages upon railway property. And yet the
question was whether Morgan a. Lewis, who
offered TO pay i cents for ride OF six miles
en- the Chicago Burlington and Quincy Rail-
road, could properly be elected because he
would not pay 20 cents. The State law fixed
8 cents per mile as a maximum fare. The
railroad fixed 20 cents as the fare for the six
miles in dispute. and maintained that the
State law was unconstitutional and void be-
cause infringing contracts created by the or
iginal charters Of the company. Thus 1t came
to pass that a controversy about cents settles
the construction OF hundreds of railway char
tiers.
The Court holds that no grant Of immunity
from legitimate governmental control can be
presumed that . State may limit the charges
for frcights and fares unless there is OK
press contract in the charter; that there
was 10 such contract ID the charter in qucs-
ton, which gave power to directors "to
establish such rates OF tolls for the con-
"veyance of persons or property as they
" shall from time to time by their bylaws
determine =; that tins grant must be construed
as subject to the laws enacted by the state
and that the legislative power TO regulate the
charges of carriers having been established
and exercised, the charter must he construct
in the light OF that established power Chief
Justice Waite delivered the opinion, from
which Justice Harlan dlssentcd, though he con-
CURED III the Judgment.
A very large number Of railroad char
ters contain no more definite grant Of
power to fix rates than is embraced in
the clause above quoted Others there are
WHICH prov iut lidi lHb hIt'tOIo may IA
charges not exceeding a specified sum per mile.
but it may be doubted whether the reasoning
OF the Court does not cover these charters
also For the greater includes the less if a
grant TO fix rates without limit must be con-
stIued as subject to State regulation, much
more a grant to fix rates within certain limits
may be held equally subject to State enact
ments. 1t is not easy TO name form
of grant which, under the opinion just
quoted. would be held to create an
express compact not subject to state regulation.
At all events, the grants that do not come
under this decision, if any there be from State
authority, must be comparatively very few in
number Virtually it is affirmed that, as to
nearly all railroads, the States can fix rates AZ
their pleasure. This, it is true, is not exactly
a new doctrine. 1t is the only legitimate con-
cluson to be drawn from the positions taken
10y the Court in the Granger cases If the
sovereign power TO regulate exists, it must in
truth be conceded that a surrender Of that power
cannot be presumed from any form of words
not embracing an express and positive compact
Nevertheless, it has been the belief of many
railroad companies and of their legal advisers
that grants Of power such as the one above
quoted would exempt company from subJec-
ton to State regulation. This belief, it
appears, the Court does not sustain. TO many
the decision will seem strange and extraOr-
binary. But this is law-abidlng country, and
the law as laid down 10y the Supreme Court
will be respected and obeyed. In the building
Of railroads hereafter, and in the purchase OF
holding of securities already existing. every
body will now understand that the State can
regulate rates if it pleases, and as it pleases.
Practically, this is no new thing. The States
have been exercising that power. The COM
panies, while protesting and resorting to
litigation, have obeyed the laws enacted. |
Hence the decision does not change the status |
of any company, except as it sweeps away
hope by many entertained that the State laws !
would eventually be held void as respects