Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1884-03-10
JUDGE BAXTER'S OPINION
IN THE TENNESSEE RAILROAD
COMMISSION CASE

| AHS LOUISVILLE anu NaSnY1lle RAILROAD
Company VS.. the Railroad Commission
OF tennessee; and the East Tennessee
Virginia and Georgia Railroad Com
pany VS.. the Railroad Commission OF
Tennessee.
Inc complainant claims to be a corpo
ration and citizen Of Kentucky. and the
defendants are the RAILROAD Commits
slon," appointed under, and pursuant to.
the act OF March 30, 1888. The provisions
oil TINS act, so far as they are material,
| VIII be recited in the progress of this
| opinion. 1t is enough for the present to
say that it purpOrts to vest the defendants
| with general supervision of all the rail-
| roads and railroad operations in Tennes-
see. The complainant, who owns and
| operates several railroads in the State,
| contends, first, that said act was not
! passed in the manner prescribed, and ac-
| cOrding to the fOrmalities required by the
| constitution; or, if it was, it was not
| passed in the form in which it has been
promulgated; and, secondly, if cOnstitu-
| tiOnally enacted, it is repugnant to the
State and Federal Constitutions, and.
| therefore, void and imperative. 1t fur
| thermOre complains that the defendants
| are about to enforce the same to it's great
! detriment and irreparabIe injury. and
/ prays for an injunction to restrain the
| defendants from interfering, under the
color thereof, with its property or bust
| ness.
Per contra, the defendants insist that
the act was regularly passed as promul-
| gated, and that it is, in all Of its pro-
| Visions, within the constitutional preroga-
! tlYes of the General Assembly and a valid
| enactment; and that the enforcement
| Jnereof, by them, Will be no legal wrong
of which the complainant has any right
! to complain.
! Our duty, therefore, is to inquire and
| determine whether there is any irTecOn-
| cIlable repugnance between the act and
| the State or Federal Constitutions. Its
/ nrst declaration is that all railroads in
| the State are public highways, over which
! all persons have equal rights of transport
| tatlon for their persons and freight, on
the payment of just and reasonable
! compensation therefor. To this we fully
! assent. Railroads have been created
mainly for the accommodation Of the pub
| lie and to facilitate the business of the
country. They are indispensable to the
| rapid and cheap transportation of CON-
| mercial commodities. Under the foster
ing care and protection hitherto extended
| to them, they have expanded into huge
| proportions. With the beginning of this
! year we had 10000 miles of road, repre-
! sentlng more than s., ZOO, 900. 600 Of capital,
! giving employment to 100000 people,
! and IN the annual receipt of more
| than So0O,O0O,O00 Of earnings. They per-
| meate every part of this extended country,
| and In large measure mOnOpOliZe the
| entire inland carrying business. Every
body, from the very eXigencIes of BUSH
ness, is compelled to patrOnize them. In
| this regard business men are left without
| any option. If unrcstrained by whole
| some legislation the public would be very
much at their mercy TheycOuld, by UNI
I just determinations, made under the
1 name OF drawbacks, rebates or other dis
ingenious pTetences, favor friends and
/ Cypress opponents, and so ADJUST and
/ graduate their rates according to the ext
| gencies OF flUctuating markets, as to Sc
/ cure to themselves or those who operate
them, an undue proportion Of advancing
| prices. Ii would, therefore, in view of these
/ obvious possibilities, be a humihating con-
! tessiOn to admit that there was no re-
| served power either in the court or the
| Legislature, to protect the public against
| such possible abuses. We do not hesl-
tate to affirm the existence of such a
| power. Every owner of property, how
| ever absolute and unqualified his title,
| holds it subject to the implied liability
/ that the use thereof shall
not be injurious to the pub
! lie. Rights of property, like social
| and conventional rights, are held subject
! to such reasonable limitations in regard
/
/ from being injurious to the rights Of
! others, and to such reasonable restraints
| and regulations, to be established by law,
1 as the Legislature may from time to time
Ordaln and establish. 1t is in this prin-
| ciple, applicable alike to all kinds of pro-
| perty, generally denOminated the ''pOttce
| pOlCer'' of the State, that the authority is
| found for such control over individuals
! and corporations and over their property,
] ~ n soft f fn stlI u Il
! promote the public convenience and vel
| fare. And in the exercise of this reserved
authority, the Legislature may require
| railroad corporations and persons Operat-
| ing railroads in the State to observe pre-
| cautiOnary measures against accident,
forbid unjust discrimination and eXtOr-
/ tiOnate charges. and, where there is no
| valid contract to the contrary, prescribe
a reasonable maximum of charges for the
| services to be performed by them, and en-
| force the same by appropriate pains and
| penalties. There are many other things
| that may be lawfully eXacted of them,
| which need not be recapitulated
! here. The Legislature, however,
| can not, under the pretense Of regulation,
! deprive a corporation of any of its essen
| tial rights and privileges. In other words,
| the rules prescribed and the power eX-
! erted must be within the police power in
| fact, and not covert amendments to their
4 charters in curtailment of their corporate
| franchises. Nor can the Legislature, in
! the exercise of this power, make any reg
| uatiOn in cOntraventiOn Of the State or
/ National Constitution. Every statute
| which inYadeS vested rights, intlicts pun
/ ishment or takes private property other
| wise than by due process of law, impairs
| the obligation OF valid contracts, or de-
/ MES to any one or more persons the equal
/ protection OF the law. are uncOnstitu-
| tiOnal and invalid. Does the act in Ques-
! ton violate any of these principles? As
| we have seen, it assumes to vest the de-
! PENDANTS with a general supervision of all
railroads and railroad operations in the
! State, aud makes it their duty ito consider
| and carefully revise the tariffs of charges
/ for transportation" etc, and if, in their
| judgment, the rate charged by them
/ lis more than just and reasonable
| compensation" for the service to be per-
! formed, or if such rate ''amOunts to I'M
| Just and unreasonable discrimination"
/ against any person, locality or corpora
! ton, they are to notify said corporations,
/ etc., of the changes necessary to reduce
| the rate to "a just and reasonable COM
pensatiOn," and TO ''ayOid unjust and I'M
! reasonable discrimination" and "when
| such changes are made or deemed I'M
! necessary" said commissioners are COM
l manded to append a certificate of approval
] 10 the ScQeuuIe OF Charges so authorized
/ bv them, and the rates thus fixed, ap-
proved and certified, shall be prima facie
/ evidence of the reasOnableness and justice
of the same; but they are, nevertheless,
subject to revision by juTies, as will be
hereafter shown.
The act does not, in express terms, COM
mand railroad carriers to adopt the rates
! prescribed bv the commissioners, but pro-
| yides that If they shall 'teXact and re-
| ceive" more than "a just and reasonable
/ COMPENSATION" or demand more than
the rates specified in any bill of lading"
/ issued by them respectively, or shall for
their advantage, or for the advantage of
any connecting line" or of ''any person
| OF locality;' or if such railroad corpora
tiOn makes any "unjust or unreasonable
| discrimination" etc. (unlesS in the full
fillment of an existing contract or some
| contract to be thereafter made for the pur-
| pose of developing some industrial enter
! prise) ), it shall be held priHd fdcie guilty
of the crime of eXtOrtiOn, as defined by the
| act, and subjected to the pains and penal
ties therein imposed; and every injured"
| party is authorized to sue for each eXtOr-
tiOnate charge and recover 'ten times the
| amount of the damages sustained" and a
reasonable fee for his counsel, unless it
| shall appear that the alleged eXtOrtionate
charge cOnfOrmed to the rates fixed by the
commission, in which contingency { if the
! Jury shall entertain the opinion that the
| rates so fixed are too high or amount to an
| unjust and unreasonable discrimination
they are required TO find for the plaintiff,
/ but only for his actual damages, eXclud-
ing the fee to counsel.
Furthermore, the commissioners them
| selves are not bound by the rates pre-
| scribed by them. On the contrary, they
| are charged with the duty of 'inVestigak-