Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1883-05-08
Aancaster 9utelligenrcr.
4 OupsriOn Settled.


A Question Settled.
The United States supreme court has
decided the case of Ruggles against the
state of Illinois in favor of the state.
Rupgles was a conductor on train of
the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy rail-
road, who ten years ago charged a
twenty cents for a six miles
ride, when the law of the state limited
the fare to be charged to three cents a
mile. The conductor was fined by a
Justice of the peace ten dollars and costs
for assaulting the passenger in ejecting
him from the train. It has taken just ten
years to get a decision from the final
tribunal of this case which is very dis
creditable to the administration of JUS
tice. Among the reforms most imper-
atiyely demanded is the acceleration OF
the wheels Of justice. 1t is wholly un-
necessary that they should move so
slowly. The longest delay is experienced
in the highest court, where there should
be the least as there the most learned
Judges and lawyers meet and the truth
should be readily eliminated. The trou-
bic is in the long list of cases on the
calendar but that is one which may
easily be remedied by enlarging the
capacity of the court to do its work.
The question between the Illinois rail-
road and the state was simply as to
whether the state had the power to limit
the charges of the railroad :; and the
court has affirmed such power to exist
in the state, unless it is restrained by
some contract in the charter. 1tfurthel
decides that the presumption is agains,
such a contract, as grants Of immunity
from legitimate government control are
never to be assumed. The state hac
given this particular company power tt
fix its rates of charges in its bylaws
but such by laws must not be repugnan
to the law of the state.
The right of state to regulate the
charges of a railroad can never again b'
questioned where the company canno
show an express grant in its charter Il
charge another sum than that which il
allowed under the general law. The ide;
entertained by railroad managers tha
they have the same control of thei
business will he upset by this decision
They are wont to think that because tn
farmer can charge what he pleases TO
his corn, and the state cannot den
him this right, therefore they ma.
charge as they please for their railroa'
service. They fail to see that the chart
cred privileges they enjoy and the pecu
liar business of the common carrie
which they follow, render them amen
able to the necessary regulations OF tn
state to protect its people.
TIE case of Dukes is again before tn
people on the hearing of the application
for his disbarmept. The charges pre-
sented against him not being sufficient.
specific, an adjournment has been hat
to permit of their being formulated
We await their appearance and the evi
dence which will he furnished to sustain
them with interest. Dukes has beeI
charged with many and heinous offences
but he has only been tried on one and o
that has been acquitted. OF course, it i
not on this charge that his disbarment i
claimed Itis probably asked because h
a libeler or a seducer, upon either o
which allegation it would be justified b.
their proof. They are offences agains
the law for the punishment Of which tn
law provides. The law for some un
known reason has not been invoked fo
the punishment of Dukes FOR libel or Sc
duction; and the opportunity for tn
demonstration of the guilt of these of
fences, offered by this disbarment pto
ceedings, must be as welcome to thos'
who accuse him as to the public gener
ally, who desire to see the guilty punish
ed and the innocent acquitted.