The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1884-04-09
The Railroad Commission Proceed
in9s to Enjoin It.

il i . solemn act IN any case 10 declare
that that body OF men 70 whom the people
have committed the sovereign function OF
making the laws Of the commonwealth
have deliberately diaregarded the hmitz-
tons imposed upon this delegated author
| ity, and usurped power which the people
have been careful 70 withhold
A bill has been fled by Messrs.
/ w. P. 4 ]. B. Harris and James Fen
tress, solicitors. at the suit of the lii
nois Central Railroad Company against
Messrs. Stone, Melville and Augustus.
Commissioners, seeking TO enjoin said
Commissioners from performing any Of
the duties imposed by the act of the
Legislature creating the Railroad Com
mission.
The prayer of the bill is that the
injunction "may be forthwith issued,
directed to the defendants, and COM
handing that they absolutely abstain
from all acts Of interference with the
management of orators business in oper-
ating the Chicago, st. Louis and New
I
Orleans Railroad; that they particular
| ly abstain from revising or establishing
or promulgating any tariff Of rates for
that road, or your orators operating the
same, and from any attempt so to inter
fere Herewith, and that they and their
agents and attorneys, absolutely abstain
from instituting or prosecuting any suit
or suits for the penalties prescribed by
the said act of the Legislature entitled,
"An act to provide for the regulation OF
freight and passenger rates on railroads
in this State, and to create Commits
sion to supervise the same and for other
purposes" approved, March IL, 1884,
until the further order of the court. "
And upon the coming in OF
.'the answers, and the further and final
hearing of the matters thereof, that said
act of the Legislature of the State OF
Mississippi be declared imperative and
void; and the said injunction be made
perpetual" and for other and further
relief.
Perhaps two-thirds of the bill, which
is of unusual length, considering Its
chara eter. is devoted to history of the
, development of the line of railroad from
Chicago to New Orleans, of which thu
Chicago, St. Louis and New Orleans
Railroad Company's line forms part
and to a statement Of the intimate con
p, nection between this and other lines o.
railroads, the volume of business trans
2 acted, and the character and qualitlca
lions necessary in the employees of rail
5 road companies. The Pith of the bill
T however, is embraced in reasonable
: limits, and to that part of it We propos'
s to address ourself.
/. 1t is charged that the actions pro
, yided for in the act are all penal, having
!, no regard to simple compensation TO
$ injury, and that it is not competent TO
the Legislature to give to the certified
opinion of the Commissioners as to wha
is ''fair and just return on the Valu
Of railroad property the weight OF Pr4m'
fdcie evidence in penal actions, and tina
still less is it competent to devolve Oh
the jury in such cases the power to de
b clare whether the act of deviation iron
the established rates shall be punishable
. In answer to this it may be said: Tha
the act does not give to the certified
opinion of the Commission as to wha
is a "fair and just return" etc, tn
weight of primd faeie evidence. As "
understand the law it directs the Com
mission to fix and regulate the tarii
charges of railroad companies and per
sons operating them, and to determin'
whether discrimination be just or unjust
and in the performance of this part o
their duty they are required to take int
consideration the character and natnr
of the service to be performed, and tn
entire business of such railroads to
gether with their earnings, ard to 81
revise their tariffs as to allow a fair ant
lust return" on the value of the rail
roads, etc. Section 6. The tariff of rate
when fixed by the Commission i
declared to be, prima facie, correc
and just. The opinion of the Commits
E sion as to what is fair and just return
is not declared to be evidence of any
e thing. 1t may be further said tina
/ this is mere alteration in the rules o
t evidence, subject over which the Leg
: islature has practically unlimited con
troll Cooley's Cons. Linn. 452. Tha
. the measure of damages is fixed b.
: statute can make no difference.
5 tits charged that the act is in confic
z with the eighth section of the first articl
t of the Constitution of the United States
t because it is a regulation of commerce
r To this we do not assent. We hold tina
e the right to fix the rates of charges 70
] public carriers is a part Of the polio
e power of the State -one of the attri
e butes of sovereignty which the Legis
+ lature cannot surrender, and we thin
c that the decision of the Supreme Cour
!, of the United States sustains US in thi
r view.
d But admitting for the sake of argu
: ment that the faithful administration Q
D the act BY the Commission involves
! regulation Of commerce, it may well b
said that the act is not in conflict wit
t any federal statute and that the pro
t vision of the Constitution of the Unite,
; States comforting the power to regulat
0 commerce among the States, is not self
j. executing provision, and it is safe to sa.
). that in the absence of legislation b.
t Congress enforcing this provision of tn
) national Constitution, the States are no
) prohibited from legislating on the sub
t Jet, and not then except that they ma.
not enact laws contrary to the nationa
. statutes or in conflict Herewith. Thi
is the drift of such authorities as II
/ have been able to consult.
A more serious charge is that the &C
! is in conflict with the tenth section O
/ the FIRST article of the federal Constitu
ton, and with the ninth section Of thu
first article Of the State Constitution
because it impairs the obligation Of !
contract and violates charter rights
We say this is a serious charge, not be
cause of anything contained IN either
: the Constitution of the United State.
, or the Constitution Of the State Of bis
sissippi, but because Of q certain decision
imposed on the Supreme Court Of The
United States By sTr. Webster when il
the full tide Of his glory, familiarly
known Is the Dartmouth College Case.