The Aberdeen examiner. [volume] (Aberdeen, Miss.) 1866-current, 1884-05-22

means of securing truth and justice In the deci-
sion of controversies, however ana whenever
arising which by their na1g aw Were If ~ 10
Submitted to such tribunal; That section OF the
act which proyides that when the management
OF any railroad m inns o!a.e t to or S
the commission, that 1t shall be the duty 81 the
commission to bring suit against the Railroad
Company thus refusing IN the name o. the STATE
of Mississippi and tina upon the trial OF such
suit certified copy OF the rate nxed by tne com
mission shall be received as primo fGct0 evi.
dence; we insist is unconstitutional and void. ~
Is clear that this provision OF the act materially
impairs the right Of trial by Jury .,.a,..,
1t makes the determination OF commission
p, ina facte evidence. 1t enables the state 10
obtain q verdict without any showing Whatever
in the outset. The Jury are Dound by tne re-
port OF the commissioners II no evidence can ne
had to the contrary. The, party in whose favor
the determination is made starts with an ad-
vantage, while his antagonist Is obliged to carry
the weight of an adverse finding from tne pc
ginning of the trial. The evidence OF the Raii.
road Company In any case under THIS act must
not only prepOnderate over that or tine state,
but must bear down the force OF the deterlnina,
ton of the commission Practlcaiiy tiiis Would i
operate as great advantage 10 one anu great
burden upon the other. - +,
The Supreme Court of Vermont, IN passing
upon a similar statute to the one under review,
in the case of Pmpt0n vs.. Town of Somerset, SO
Vermont page 2s3, said: "A trialby jury, within
the meaning Of the constitution, not only sup
poses that the controversy between the hartits
Shall be submitted to twelve jurors, but That IL
shall be submitted to them for their minds to
weigh the evidence unaffected by the opinion or
Judgment of any other tribunal IN regard 10 u.
1t Is to be Il trial by !nrB The jurors are 10
hear for themselves, to use their own.ludgment,
and the verdict is to be the result Of their de.
liberation and reflection upon the testimony auu
argument. If the Judgment OF some other Dody
uu1n the same matters is substituted for and Is
to control the decision OF their MINDS, their ac
ton upon the subject ceases to be trial ana ne
comes hut the mere recording OF verdict made
for them by Others If the Judgment OF another
body is so substituted IN part. We rlght y IN,
paired to the extent OF the substitution Heren
lies the fatal objection to tlils clause Oh the
statute" ,,o co,,,+ -,
So in the language of the Supreme Court OF
Vermont we say Herein lies one OF tne many
fatal objections 70 me ac1 o, on S,, voation oi
limits Of this great Republic of ours, which are
under the IAN ay person Of
life, liberty or property without que protess o,
law, nor deny to any person the equal pro'ec'ioh
This net provides that the owners and holders
of railroad stock issued by any railroad, either
located in whole Or in part in inns otate' sliail
only receive fair and JUST return on tan ntue
of tho road, its equipments ana appuItefHanceSi
not a far and ustrehrn on the amount OF money
Invested in the enterprise. we contend that
this is not giving such tS sta te sa eyb a
party may receive per cent interest upon the
entire amount of money loaned. and that ne may
hive the right to eontract for 10 per cent h.,
Neither does the act effect the stock ISSUED ny
express companies or steamboat companies, al
though they are savage competitors Tor the nlisl-
ness Of railroads and are also common carriers.
1t is a discrimination among persons OF tne
same class, which denies equal protection OF tne
laws us guaranteed under the 1it'l amehdment
of the Constitution Of the United States 80
that the effect Of the act Isl that II person IN
vest in railroad stocks or other securities, ne is
denied the legal rights accorded to all other
persons. In other words, IT Is made almost
penal to invest IN Mississippi railroad stocks.
Thus in the effort made in this act TO regulate
roads, the property of the individual, whether
he be creditor or stakeholder. Is exposed TO
fnes and penalties not put upon otllet nat ural
D rsOns or investors in other corporations;
We do not think that your HONOR VIII elelorse
this act and say That because "A chooses 70
put his money in railroad c4rpota.ond III ana an5
that all the constitutional shields ana barriers
fall from around it and leave 1t uncovered ana
unprotected" See also Am. and Eng. H. II.
cases page /. . =,
The act also provides that the property Of
those inere sted in railroads IN TINS state siiaii
be taken on the opinion OF tllree men, Ur ~
other words, the opinion OF the commission Is
made prima facie evidence, but the law Is not
applicable to other persons, ana OF COURSE u9es
not bear equally upon all alike. ana thuS E w
lates the i4th Amendment, Am and Eng.
rh he act also requires the State to pay the
witnesses attending before the commission III
behalf oil partleS eoihIiaitinS , !" hui in
to the final result OF such compiailnt' ~. IN
to BAY Tits its own witnesses which is nots. equal
protection under the law 1t is imposing DuI,
dcns upon one in every aspect OF the case ; ana
r suit in absolute failure. See case ofC9nnty OF
Santa Clara VS. the Southern Pacific X. 4. Com
pany. is Federal Reporter, page 3eo me me
question of commerce "among the states VIII
be discussed by my associate, Hon refer
Hamilton. 49,. .,,o
We conclude confidently believing mat the
Court will declare this oppressive act uncoh-
L. l.. RUSSELL,
Solicitor for Complainant.