The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1884-09-10
Not Satisfied.

You do not give me the benefit Of full
statement Of the question arising under
the contract clause of the Constitution.
This rather seems to be ignored. state
the proposition thus ain other words,
whether the Legislature can, BY charter,
delegate this power, Ito regulate and fix
rates., to the railway corporations, and
thus deprive itself of the power to regulate
fares, and restrict its power to that Of
keeping such carriers, within common law
rules, by general laws alone for the pun
ishment Of extortion and unjust diserimi-
nation" The answer to this think is in
a nutshell. The power to build railroads,
! and fix and regulate fares for tranEporta-
ftion OF persons and property over them, are
attributes of sovereignty. The power to
build railroads may be conferred upon rail-
way companies. and the right to appropriate
private property delegated as a necessary
incident; and the other, being subservient
to the greater power, may be also granted.
But the power to ertOTf or anjHstly to dis
crimiHate, the Legislature itself does not
possess, and cannot, therefore, grant. II
the power to fix and regulate fares may
be granted the controversy is ended. We
are not concerned about the question as
to whether the Legislature, IN The absence O
any charter contract, has the right to say
what shall, prima fteie, be deemed reasOna-
be rates. That has been often and over
decided, and was decided in the cases to
which you refer. 1t is not an open ques-
ton. But when the charter confegs upon a
raitray company the poaoer 10 fz and rega-
late understandable rates-the Legisla-
ture has deprived itself of this attribute Of
sovereignty, and the question as to whether
the corporation riolateS its corporate duty is
necessarily judicial question. 1t is quite
manifest that in the supervision bill the
Legislature did not, itself, attempt TO "fx
and regulate rates." nor did it provide for
the punishment of "extortion and unjust
determinations, as such offences were
known when the railroad charters were
granted. When such attempt is made We
may have something to say on this subject.
l know you do not desire to put me in an
improper position, and, therefore, trouble
you with statement w. l.. NUGENT.
In justice to Col. NUGENT we admit
that he did notice the case of Peik a.
Chicago and northeastern Railroad Com
Pdny, not exactly as stated, however, but
in the following language, (italics ours:)
"In "a U. s., LIS the power ITO regulate
commerce. seems 20 have been extended
beyond purely domestic traffic, but the
utterance has not since been sustained to
the extent claimed by counsel, and we do
not think will be followed"
In justice TO ourselves we will say
that this extract is found on the third
page of thirty-eight page brief, under
the heading Introductory" and forms
no part of the brief"or argument proper
to which we naturally enough turned to
see how Col. NUGENT would dispose of
this most important case, seeing, as we
before stated, that it was the only ease
to be found in the books, directly in
point. 1t is not a case where the power
to regulate commerce seems to have been
extended beyond purely domestic traffic,
but it is a case where the power to regu-
late rates on interstate traffic was recog-
nized and enforced. Why will it not be
followed? Being the best, the latest and
only case in point, it is fair to presume
that it will be followed.
Col. NUGENT again admits that he
does not claim more for the contract of
the Natchez, jackson and Columbus
Railroad Company than that it author
ICES the company to charge reasonable
rates, and that to charge more than rea-
sonable rates would be violatiFe of its
corporate duty; but he still insists that |
what are reasonable rates is a judicial
question, because at the common law it
was judicial question. As to this Mr..
Chief-Justice WAITE has said:
But mere eommon-law regulation of |
trade or business may be changed by /
statute. A person has no property, no vested /
interest. in any rule of the common law
That is only one Of the forms of the NUM- |
cipal law, and is no more sacred than any
other. To limit the /
rate of charges for services rendered in
public employment, or for the use of prop
erty in which the public has an interest,
is only changing regulation which existed
before. MlnS T. Illinois, "a u. s., li3.
OF this decision Mr.. Justice FIELD,
who is a standby of all corporations,
said:
$50 long as that decision remains it will
be waste of words to discuss the ques-
tions argued by counsel in these cases.
The Granger cases. That decision in
its wide sweep, practically destroys all the
guarantees of the Constitution and of the
common law invoked by counsel for the
protection Of the rights of the railroad
Yet that decision is now the law of .
he land, acquiesced in by everybody
md sustained by everybody, unless it be
he owners of grain elevators who de-
ire to rob the public under the form Of !
aw. We doubt not when the sans !
curt decides the railroad cases Col. !;
SUGENT and his grasping clients viii be :
eard to utter opinions very similar to i
hat Mr.. Justice FIELD expressed in /
he language quoted. 8
aBut, says Col. NuGENT, ..in the cases il
D which you refer there was no charter '
ontract that the State would not FIX I,
ites.s TO which We reply, that there is is
o such stipulation in the charter Of the n
Iatchez, jackson and Columbus Rail-
lad Company. Under its charter the
,mpany has, as stated by Col. EUGENT, y
le power to Elk, regulate and receive q
he tolls and charges to be by them re- s
lived for the transportation Of persons {
I'd property upon its road. Without 8
us authority, conferred BY the Legisla- =
ne, the company would not have the g
ght to SIX, regulate and receive tolls. 2 q
his is admitted. So that constituting 2
e language strictly it covers a mere g
iFilege to the company TO sfx, regu- Y
Re and receive tolls within the limits Y
reasonableness, Of course. But the 70
before the court now is that
is language is to be extended 80 Is to =
san that the company may not emily s.
<, regulate and receive tolls. but that s
: State win never undertake to pre- :,
'ibe maximum tolls, or to prescribe 8,
d that Will Be. p1su,a JACK, reasonable, :.
1 that uhathsr tolls ere reasonable Or s.
{ shall not Be determined outside o. s.