The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1884-04-09
found support IN the Constitution Of the

found support ID the Constitution Of the
general government.
Compliments also invoke the proyis
ion Of the fourteenth amendment,
saying that they hare been denied the
equal protection Of the laws, in this: that
express companies and carriers BY water
are exempted from the provisions OF the
act. This amendment has been hereto
fore invoked As comforting the right 70
sell intoxicating liquors against the pro-
hibition Of State laws, and We think vas
as applicable to that case as TO this. And
the very claim made now by the Illinois
Central Railroad Company was made BY /
another railroad company and denied BY |
the Supreme Court of the United States
Chicago, ete., Railroad Company e.
Ioara, "a Z. S., 155. In fact it is now
conceded that the fourteenth amend
ment guarantees no more protection
than was guaranteed before its adoption
fby 1.-THE Law of the Land"
As to the alleged violations of the
fourth and ninth articles of the State
Constitution, we deny that the act either
vests in the Commission power to enact
laws prescribing tariff rates for railroads
or to adjudge a reduction Of rates in the
sense that determination of the Com
mission in that behalf could be called a
] e.
1t is also charged that sections one,
two and twenty-three of the act are OBJ
noxious to section two of the first article
of the Constitution of Mississippi, which
declares that "That no person shall be de-
. prived Of life, libert. u property except
by due course of law, because the Of
Tense of extortion is not defined. An
examination of these sections of the act
shows that the charge is without foun-
dation. Section one defines extortion to
be exacting, receiving or demanding
more than the rate specified in any bill
of lading, or discriminating in transpor
tation against any individual locality or
corporation. Phis seems to be clear
definition. Section two prescribes the
measure of damages in suits to recover
the penalty. This seems clear. Section
twenty-three fixes penalty for viola
ton of any of the provisions of the act
or the tariff of charges as fixed by the
Commission. We are free to confess, as
to this section, that there may be viola
) tions of the provisions of the act for
, which the penalty could not be recov-
cred, but the tariff of rates when fixed
by the Commission, the failure to OBJ
serve which is condemned BY the act,
: will be certain enough, we warrant, to
suit the tastes of the most technical
!, criminal lawyer.
c There is literally no warrant for the
e assertion that there is anything in the
act which gives TO penal law the mis-
r chievions operation of an Ct post Jaefc
g law. If the Commission be allowed to
r proceed under the act and Obeys it'
r plain and simple behests, no case car
] possibly arise where an act which was in
t nocent at the time of its commission
e will merit a penalty at the time of trial
a and we challenge any who do not agree
t with us to furnish a Hypothetical case
n to which the doctrine of er post .jactr
: could apply.
D The charge that the eighteenth sec
), ton of the act which requires that re
I ception rooms, bulletin boards showing
arrival and departure of trains, etc, ii
t violative of section ten, article one o.
{ the State Constitution, because it is il
e effect the taking of private property fol-
: public use without compensation, ought
e not to be seriously considered. Cooley''
:. Cons. Linn, Z 0, note.
c 1t is objected that the act requires Tx
], production before the Commission Of
f copies of all leases, contracts and agree
0 ments for transportation, with express
E sleeping car, or other companies tt
e which they are parties, (Sec. 12) and
also that those who operate railroads
. make quarterly returns. (Sec's 10, II
and ~ These are incidents Of the
: mildest SOFT of supervision, and We ap
$ prehend that there is no constitutional
difficulty in the way Of the Legislature
I creating commission to examine into
any matter and to provide under penal
ties that desired evidence be furnished
when demanded
The objection that the Commission i:
{ required to pay witnesses summoned by
it, and that witnesses summoned by thC
railroad companies are not to be paid By
/ the Commission, is without merit and is
probably urged by way of inducement
We have reviewed the constitutions
objections to the Railroad Commission
as stated in the injunction bill at some
length, because of the great importance
y of correct determination of the ques
;, tions; and at the conclusion, keeping in
! mind familiar rules of construction, W,
are at a loss to account for the opinion
expressed BY many that the injunction
will be granted and perpetuated. Leg
i,lative acts are presumably valid
Courts repose on the conclusions of tht
Legislature. A conflict between a star
: ute and the Constitution is not to b
implied. Courts will give effect to Leg
isIative enactments if possible withou
stopping to inquire what construction
might be warranted by the natural i'm
port Of the language used. These arr
some of the almost innnmerable limita
! tions on the power of the courts to over
: ride the legislative will.