The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-01-05
An Opinion Which Is Believed to Sustain the
Constitutionality Of the Restraints Pro-
posed by Interstate Commerce Bills.
Indications that the President Made a
Mistake in DenOuncing the Press.
The Small Salaries the Government Pays to
Men Who Assume Great Responsible
ties-The Recent Bond Call.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE.


A Decision Which Is Believed to Settle I'm
portant Constitutional Points.
Special to the Indianapolis Journat.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 4.--The best lawyers in
Congress say they consider that the decision. to-
day, of Chief Justice Waite, of the United States
Supreme Court, confirming the acts of the Rail
road Commission created by the State Legis-
lature OF Mississippi, in March, 1884, determines
the constitutionality of the problem involved in
the Cullom, Reagan, and other interstate-com-
merce bills. The strongest argument made against
these measures has been that they were unconstit
utional; that neither States nor general govern
ment could interfere with the operations Of rail
road or other private property. The Commission
created by the State of Mississippi was given
more authority and went further than has been
proposed by any of the interstate commerce
bills. Friends of the Cullom and Reagan bills
believe this decision will materially assist them
in securing the passage of an interstate com
merce law. The decision is as follows
John Nj. Stone and Others composing the Rail-
road Commission of the State of Mississippi,
against the Farmers Loan and Trust Company;
appeal from the Circuit Court of the district Of
Mississippi. This is of the Mississippi Railroad
Commission cases 1t was brought By the Farm
ers Loan and Trust Company, OF New York, to
enjoin the Railroad Commission, of Mississippi,
from enforcing against the Mobile & Ohio Rail
road Company the provision of the statute of
Mississippi, passed in 1884, to provide for the
regulation of freight and passenger rates on rail
roads in the State, and for other purposes. The
public highways, over which all persons have
equal rights. and makes any discrimination in
rates penal offense. 1t further provides
for the appointment of Board of
Commissioners, and confers upon it the power of
revising the tariff of charges and of exercising
certain degree of supervision over the roads.
The companies are required to make certain re-
ports to the Commission, and the officers of the
roads are made liable to fine for noncompliance
with the provisions OF the act, which fine may be
collected by or through the courts. The Circuit
Court rendered decree allowing the injunction,
and from that decree the Commissioners ap-
pealed. The argument in support of the decree
is that the statute under which the Commission
are to act impairs the charter Of the company;
that it denies the company the equal pro-
lection of the laws, and deprives it
of its property without the process of
law that it confers both legislative and judicial
powers on the Commission, and ia thus repug-
nant to the Constitution of Mississippi and
that it is void on it's face by reason of its incon
sistency and uncertainty. The Supreme Court
finds that the charter of the company contains
no contract the obligations of which are in any
way impaired by the statute under which the
Com mmissioners are to act. 1t finds that the Com
mission is, in express terms prohibited by the
act of the State Legislature from interfering
with the charges of the company for the trans
portation OF persons or property through Missis-
sippi from one State to another. The
Dohns in conflict wts as se
of the United States. The great purpose,
it says, of the statute in question, is to effect
medium of charges, and to regulate, in some
matters OF police nature, the railroads
in the State In its general scope it is
constitutional, and it applies equally to all per-
sons or corporations owning operating rail
roads in the State The Supreme Court of the
State of Mississippi has already declared that the
statute is not repugnant to the State Constitu-
ton. and in this opinion the Supreme Court of
the United States concurs.
1T is difficult tc understand" the opinion says
in conclusion. precisely on what ground we are
expected to decide that this statute is
so inconsistent and uncertain as to render
it absolutely void on its face. When the COM
mission has acted. and proceedings are had to
enforce what they have done. questions may
arise as to the validity of some of the various
provisions which will be worthy of consideration,
but we are unable to say that, as a whole, the
statute is invalid"
The decree of the Circuit Court was reversed,
and the cause remanded, with instructions to
dismiss the bill. The opinion was delivered by
the Chief justice. Justices Field and Harlan dis
sented from certain of the opinions expressed by
the court in this case. but concurred in the jude
ment Justice Blatchford did not sit in this case,
or take any part in the discussion.
John M. Stone ct al, r. r. Commissioners, of
Mississippi, appellants, VS.. the Illinois Central
Railroad Company and case No. 124. the same
appellants vs. the New Orleans & Northwestern
Railroad Company, were reversed in accordance
with the decisions in Stone vs.. the Farmers
Loan and Trust Company Justice Blatchford
took no part in these cases.