Kimball enterprise. (Kimball, Brule County, Dakota [S.D.]) 188?-1883, 1883-05-18
ness still to be met with in the superior,
races are mere "survivals."-St. James
Copo}%a -".H.- .l H
GRANGER LAWs SUSTAINED.

The Supreme Court of n Uniteo
States Decides n Very Important
Case and Gives the Railroads q Sc
we're Touchdown.
WASHINGTON, Special Telegram, May u
The supreme court to-day decided the cases
If The State of Illinois vs. The Illinois Central
ind The Chicago, Burlington & Quincy roads
seldom have railroads received snch
Ia kpock-down blow from the courts
The chief justice delivered the OPINION
N each case which was unanimous and sus-
aimed the granger laws to their fullest ex-
,ent 1t was decided that the legislature has
the power in all cases to regulate both freight
md passenger charges without reference the
-oad's char ter.
The case arises out of the facts below sci
forth:
On the 18th of March, 1873, Morgan A.
Lewis, q passenger on n train OF the CnlcaGo,
Burlington & Quincy railroad, rendered Neal
Ruggles, a conductor OF that company, 10
cents as fare for his transportation from
Buda to Neponser, q distance Of six miles.
This was a maximum rate of 3 cents per
mile, as prescribed by the statute of Illinois
then in force. The conductor demanded
20 cents, which was the fare fixed by the
railroad company. Lewis refused to pay more
|tuul lSlltCS anu ~
attempted to eject him from the cars. For
this act the conductor was prosecuted before a
Justice Of the peace upon tho charge OF
assault and battery and fined $40 and
costs. The case was then car
riea up through the State courts
by successive appeals, the railroad company
sustaining the conductor and raising the ques-
lion of the right of the State to interfere with
its business by fixing a rate of fare and trans
portation. A decision was finally rendered III
favor of the State by its highest court. The
railroad company thereup.n appealed
70 the supreme court OF the United
States upon tho ground that the act
Of the general assembly of Illinois
Of April 10 and II fixing the maximum rate
ST charges for the transportation of passengers
IN the railroad in the State was unconst,tu-
tional and void because it implied an obligation
If the contract contained in tho charters of the
various companies which were merged iuto tho
Chicago, Burlington e. Quincy Railroad COM
pany by the consolidation. This court holds:
First-That the grants of immunity from legiti-
mate governmental contract are never to be pre-
sumed on. On the contrary. the prescriptions are
all the other way, aad unless the exemption I,
clearly established the legislature Is free to ACT
jurisdiction as the public interests may
seem to require. A State may limit the amount Of
charges by the raiiroad companies for fares and
fEeights unless restrained by some contract in the
oshN AAoc - 80 EA'SSbk NhSV
there is no such restraint. The State,
1t is true, has given the board OF
directors Of the railroad company the power tc
establish rates of toll for conveyance of persons
and property as they shall from time to time By
their bylaws determine, but such bylaws
must not be repIgnant to the consti-
tuition and laws Of the State, If the
State had not legislative power tc
regulate charges o. carriers for hire the case
would be different, but that question has
been settled and amended, and the char
ter which this company secured from
the legislature must be construed in
light that established power The Judgment of the
supreme court of Illinois is Affirmed with costs.
Opinion by Chief Justice Waite. Justice Harlan
ooncurs in judgment, but no. in opinion. Justice
Blatchford did not site in case a decision was
Illinois Central Railroad company, in error, against
people of the State OF Illinois. which involves pre.
cisely the same questions wh:an ware presented in
in its opinion in that case. Judsmen, of the
supreme court of Illinois is affirmed.