The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1886-12-15
Col. Nugent s Letter.

1t is impossible that the public has
been as badly misled by the letter of the
Railroad Commissioners to Senators
George aud Walthall and the Attorney
General, as Col Nugent seems to be-
lieve. In that letter the Commissioners,
referring to the action of the Federal
Court, say:
The Federal Court in Mississippi has as
-umed to authorize the receiver of road
wholly within the State to disregard and
ignore the rates fixed by tie Railroad Com
mission on freight transportation from one
point to another within this State, and, at
this date, under the protecting agis of that
tribunal, in advance of any trial or deter
mination of the question of the reasonable
ness OF the rates, the Viek7burg and
Meridian Railroad is openly defying
the State laws and State authority by op-
Grating tariff Of charges higher than than
fixed by the Commission, and which dis
eliminates between points on its line,
whereby it not only incurs penalties but
becomes, under the State law, guilty of the
crime of extortion punishable as a misde-
meanor.
Col. Nugent thinks that this state
ment by the Commissioners "placed
Judge Hill in false position before the
public" and Contained an implied,
though not intended imputation" upon
his impartiality; and, to set the matter
right, he gives the history of the pro,
ceeding which called forth the Commits
sioners reference to the Federal Court
of which Judge Hill is one of the judges.
The substantial averments of the Com
u issioners are that the Federal Court
has assumed to authorize the receiver
Of the Vicksburg & Meridian Railroad
to disregard and ignore the rates fixed
by the Railroad Commission, and that
the Receiver in advance of any trial or
determination of the question of the
reasonableness of the rates fixed, is
openly defying the State laws. These
averments, Col. Nugent does not deny
but admits. He may make some point
on the phraseology of the order of Judge
Hill to the Receiver to "obey the man
date of the Commission, or show cause
to the contrary" but it is still the fact
that the Receiver did not obey the
mandate of the Commission" and that
Judge Hill has determined that the
tariff fixed by the Commission is I'M
reasonable, in advance of any proceed
ing by them to compel its observance.
As fact he has set it aside in whole
and in part, and has ordered the Receiy-
er to arrange another tariff and submit
it 10 the Commissioners for revision, the
presumption being that if the Receiver
and the Commissioners again disagree,
the course pursued by the Receiver and
the court with reference to the first tar
iff will be pursued with reference to the
second tariff In other words it is clear
to US that Judge Hill intends to decide
in advance of any such legal proceeding
as is contemplated by the State law,
whether any tariff of freight charges
fixed by the Commission is reasonable
or unreasonable, and having decided
that it is unreasonable he will not per-
init the enforcement of any penalties for
its violation if he can helpit.
The conduct of the receiver in snap
ping his fingers in the face Of the State
and defying its authority in spite of the
repested and admitted judicial decisions
that it is the function of the State Leg
islsture to control commerce conducted
exclusively within its limits, is arrogant
beyond description.
The Receiver speaking through his at
torney still denies the power of the
Commission to regulate freight rates.
Tne State must continue to insist upon
| it, or, yielding, turn over its citizens to
the merciless corporation.