The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1886-11-12

The Supreme Court Of the United
States has rendered = decision OF inter.
est in the case Of The Wabash, ST. Louis
4 PAciGc Railroad Company W. The
People Of the State Of Illinois. The
rlilrOad company, It appeared, had
charged one 6sm l5c. per hundred
pOunJs for the transportation Of goods
frou Peoria to New York city, and on
che same day charged other persons
2bc. per hundred pounds for the same
class Of goods from Gilman, H., to New
York, Gilman being Eearer than Peoria
30 New York. This discrimination, it
was alleged, was in violation Of the Law
Of Illinois which prohibits any charge
Tor the transportation of passengers or
froigh. within the state Of Illinois pro-
portiOnately greater than would be
charged for the transportation Of pas
songsrs or like classes Of freight over =
greater distance Of the same road. The
Supreme Court Of Illinois decided
against the railroad company, but its
decision has been reversed by the Su-
prsme Court Of the United States on
the ground that the regulation in ques-
ticn Is one Of a national character. which
falls within the power Of Congress. The
court said "When it is attempted to
? apply 70 transportation through an en-
hire series of states principle Of this
q kind, and each one Of the states, or 81
half dozen states, shall attempt to es-
tAblish It's own rstss Of transportation,
iss own methods 20 prevent discrimina-
zion in rates, or to permit it, the dele
tsrious influence upon the freedom oi
commerce among the states aud upon
che transportation Of goods through
those states cannot be overostimatsd.
That this species of regulation is one
which must be, if established at all of q
general and national character, and cam
not be safely and wisely rsmitted to
local rules and local regulations, we
Oh ok ia clear from what has already
bssn said. Aud if it be regulation Of
Commerce. as we ehink we have demon
BirHted it is, and as the Illinois court
ocneedes It to be, il must be of that ma
tional character, and tho regulation can
Ouly appropriately be By general rules
aud principles, which demand that IL
should be done by the Congress Of the
United States under thecomnerce clause
of the constitution. It cannot be too
strongly insisted upon that the right Of
continuous transpor tation from one end
Of the country to the other is essential
In modern times 10 that freedom Of
commerce from the restraint which the
stats might choose to impose upon it
which the commerce clause In the cen
Btitution was intended to secure. The
clause Of the constitution giving Con-
grsss the power to regulate commerce
among the states and with foreign ma
lions, as this court has said before, was
among the most important Of the sub
jeoss which prompted the 70, O,mation OF
che constituti N, ,sn1 it would be very
tssble aud almost useless provision, but
poorly adapted to secure the entire free
d 'm Of commsrc- among the states
which wls desmed essential to q more
perfect union BY the trainers Of the
constitution, IL &C evory stage Of the
tran sDortation of goods and ehattels
through the country che state within
whose limits part Of the transporta-
tion must be done could impose regula.
tions concerning the prizes, compensation
or taxation, or any other restrictive reg
ulation interfering with sud seriously |
embarrassing this commerce"
Feou this it will appear clear to
Overy thinking man that if the people |
Of the country are to have any relief
from the curse Of railroad discrimination \
that relief must come from Congress
and not from the State Legislatures.
Every newspaper in the country net
now under the influence Of railroads
should appeal to the people to insist
upon Congress passing such laws as
will crush out discrimination.