The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1884-05-14
pECIsIoH OF
Juigs Bill On Railroad Supervision
II rHE Crncurr CoURr OF THE UsITED
srArrs ron THE soUTHERN DISTRICT OF
MrssrssIPPI. IN CHAMBERsc

I
MISSISSIPPI, N CHAMBERss
The Illinois Central Railroad Company
John N. Stone, VIM. Neville and ". p.
Augussns.
The questions now presented for decision
arise upon compliments motion for = PR
liminary injunction to restrain the deienu-
ants As Railroad Commissioners tor the
State Of Mississippi from, in any way,
interfering with the complainant, or ~
agents, in the management and business O
operating its railroad, The questions pre-
seuted have been most'ably aud exhaustive,
" argued BY the distinguished and learned
counsel on both sides, and are questions OF
momentous Importance to the people ana
~ The commerce Al interests OF the country
at large, as we'll as to the complainant ana
all whose interest it represents. The facts
set forth in the bill, not being controverted,
for the purposes of the motion, are 10 DC
taken to be true.
These facts, so far as they relate to the
questions now to be decided, are, IN sub
stance. AZ follows: 1.-THE complainant
corporation was created BY an act OF the
Legislature Of the State of Illinois, and II
the owner of and operates the Illinois Cen
trail Railroad and It's branches and connec-
lions, running north1rom the city OF Cairo,
in the State of Illinois, and is the lessee OF
and operates the Chicago, st. Louis and
New Orleans Railroad and its branches
extending south, from Cairo TO the city Of
New Orleans in the State OF Louisiana.
The Chicago, ST. Louis and New Orleans
Railroad Company is a corporation, created
| ~ lie Legislatures of the State OF Louisa
ana, Mississippi, Tennessee and Kentucky,
| as q continuous line of railroad communl-
cation between the cities of New Orleans
and Cairo, and there to connect with thu
Illinois Central Railroad and its branches
| and connections so as to affvrd con-
nected line of transportation for persons
and commercial commodities from the city
of New Orleans and its commercial connec-
tons on the Mississippi river, Gull OF Mex
| leo, and railway connections, and all inter
mediate connections by railroad or water
from New ORLEANS to the terminus OF tht
Illinois Central Railroad, its branches and
connections; thus afording great com
mercial highway 4rom the Gulf on thu
South, to the Lakes on the North"
The bill further alleges that the purpose
of those who built this extensive channel
of commercial communication, and thu
the people, who have contributed thereto,
and which they would not otherwise hav,
done. was to establish highway for thu
transportation of persons and articles OF
commerce, for the benefit of themselves and
all others who might desire to avail them
selves OF this mearis Of rapid transit, from
one part of the United States 10 another
and to other parts of the world, and over
which hundreds OF thousands OF persons
and many millions of property. are con
SANITY being transported, and have beer
for years past without interruption iron
any State authority until recently.
The bill further States that the Chicago
St. Louis and New Orleans Railroad. ant
of the New Orleans, jackson and Grea
Northern Railroad, and all the property
; connected Herewith owned by said railroad
companies; the former extending from
Canton, in the State of Mississippi, to Cairo
in the State of Illinois, passing through
the States of Tennessee and Kentucky, AM
the latter from New Orleans, in the Stat
Of Louisiana, TO Canton, in this State, boil
being Interstate railroads; and by sait
! purchase became vested with all the right
. and privileges of the debtor corporations
he sales having been made to satisfy debt
,wing by said corporations respectively.
That as a condition upon which the cor
! 1orste powers were, by the Legislature o
The State OF Mississippi, granted to tn
Chicago, st. Louis and New Orleans Rail
I road Company, il was required Of SAT-
: corporation that it would pay to the State
ali the Indebtedness due from said corpu
rations whose property and rights ha'
been SO purchased, and Tor which salt
purchaser was not responsible, aud whicl
: payment, to the amount Of 81 5S, 97SS2, ha
oeen made. That Under the charterc,
rights so purchased and the act of iIc0rpo
ration it expressly granted to said cor
] poration the right and power to adapt, es
Labllsh, and change at pleasure, a tariff @
charges; that the same right and powe
was granted to the debtor corporation
/ which was so purchased by complainant
.essor, together with the right aud powe
70 $, lect all necessary officers, agents an,
employees, and to control and manage an,
operate said railroad and all the bushes
and property connected Herewith,
The bill further charges that the Legis
lature Of the State OF Mississippi, on tn
; llth day OF March, 1884, passed an &C
] which has been approved by the Governo
If said State, entitled ''an act to urovid
for the regulation OF freight and passengv
: rates on railroads in this State and to ere
ate a commission to supervise the same
and for other purposes" That under tn
provision of this act the defendants hav
been appointed and commissioned as sucl
: commissioners, and have entered upon tn
: discharge of their duties as such, an,
threaten to interfere with the rights O
complainant to which it has succeeded a
such lessee, and which have been en-
D joyed and exercised by those who's
rights complainant has purchased, for
quarter OF century, without jnSt com
, plant, which interference, it is alleged,
permitted, will greatly injure and embar
rass complainant in the management ant
control OF said railroad and the trans
portations OF persons and freight over th
same, IN violation of the Just tights ant
privileges So purchased and granted. and il
violation OF, and in conflict with the Con
stitution of the State of Mississippi ant
OF the United States, and from doins
which the bill prays the defendants may b,
restrained and enioined by the decree O
this court. Whether the act of the Legis
lature creating the commission and givi,e
it the powers and imposing the dutie,
therein provided, is wise or unwise. on this
one hand, or whether the acts of the com
plainant intended to be controlled by it
are just grounds of complaint, on the
other, are questions over which this court
will not undertake TO decide. The only
question is, did the Legislature have the
power and authority under the Constitu
ton of the State of Mississippi and the
United States, toenact the law? Or. to state
the question ia other words, do any of the
provisions oflhe act, and ii so, which OF
them violate or conflict with. any of. the
provisions OF both, or either Of these Con-
situations? If they do not, then the act
must be maintained and the complainant.
Il suffering a wrong, must apply to the
Legislature for relief, but if they do, then
the act, so far as it does violate any Of
these constitutional rights, must be de-
clared void and treated as If the act ha I
never been passed.
It is a well established aud cardinal
rule as expressed by Chief Justice Mar
shall, in the csse of FLETCHER VS.. Peck.
Sixth CTaneh, 81, ''the question whether a
law be void for its repugnancy 10 the
/ Constitution, is, at all times, a question of
much delicacy, which ought seldom, if
ever, to be decided in the affirmative
in doubtful cases. The court, when inn
PEELED BY duty to render such a judgment
would be unworthy Of his station, could he
be unmindful of the obligation which that
station imposes. But it is not on slight
implication, and vague conjecture that the
Legislature is to be pronounced to have
transcribed its powers, and its acts to be
considered as void. The opposition be-
tween the Constitution and the laws should
be such that the Judge feels strong con-
viction of their ineompaiibiIity with each
other But when the ildieial mind i
clearly satisfied of the repugnancy Of the |
legislation to the Constitution, the funda- |
mental law, then the court has no aIterna- |
tive but TO so declare it, and to hold The
act Of the Legislature void. Another rule |
i that when there are different and dis-
tinct provisions ii an act and some of |
them are in conflict with the Constitution