The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1886-10-30

WASHINGTON, Oct 25.-The United States
Supreme Court has just rendered another
decision Of great Importance on the SUBJ
ject Of Interstate commerce. It is q do.
cision which will attract more attention
even than the former decision on the same
subject. 1t probably goes quite as far in
the nsser ion Of the power of the General
Government over the commerce of the
States as is desired by the most extreme
centralist, and it will, for the same reason,
excite the most determined opposition of
the State rights school. The commercial
consequence of a logical enforcement Of
this decision will be very great Briefly
stated, the majority of the court say:
"we must, therefore, hold that Il is not and
never has been the deliberate opinion Of u
majority of this Court that statute of State
which attempts to regulate the fares and
charges by railroad companies within its
limits for a transportation which constitutes
a part OF commerce among the States, ia .
valid law"
The case comes up from Illinois, and Is
known as the case of the Wabash railroad.
the Wabash, st. Louis and Pacific Railroad
Company had, in violation of u statute Of
the State of Illinois, been guilty of an un-
just discrimination in its rates or charges
of toll and compensation for the transpor-
tation of freight. The specific charge is
that the railroad on the same charged FL
twenty five thousand pounds OF
goods and chattes from Peoria, in the State
OF Illinois, to New York, the sum Of thirty
nine nj safaan saollars ssirs At the 5st, rate
pounds for said carload; and that
on the same day they agreed to carry and
transport for Issac Baily and F. o. Swa-
nell another carload of goods and chattels
from Gilman, in the State of Illinois, to
charged the sum of sixty-flve dollars, being
at the rate Of twenty-five cents per hum
dred pou nds. And it is alleged that the
carload carried for Elder and Mckinney
was carried eighty-six miles farther in the
State of Illinois than che other carload of
the same weight. The opinion Of the Court
is quite long, exceeding four thousand
words. The following are some of its more
important points:
''The charge exacted from the shippers was
charge for Interstate transportation, and
was not susceptible of division which would
allow so much of 1t to be charged to com.
merce strictly within the State. and so much
more to commerce in other States. The u
preme Court of Illinois does not place it's
Judgment in the present case on the ground
that the transportation and the charge in
but. concedng that it may be case Of com.
merce among the States, or Interstate COM
merce, which Congress would have the power
right to regulate il 1t had attempted to do so,
argues thai this statute of Illinois belongs to
that class of commercial regulations which
may be subject to the laws OF State until
Congress shall have exercised its power on
that subject"
As to the former decision of the Supreme
Court in the case Of Mum VS.. Illinois, the
Court in its present decision says:
The question Of how far charge made for
continuous transportation over several
States, which included u State whose laws
were In question, may be divided into sep
arate charges for each State, in enforcing the
power OF the State to regulate the charges of
cred. The Court says: ut can not be too
strongly insisted upon that the right of con-
tinuous transportation from ono end OF the
country to the other is ess ntial in modern
times, that freedom of commerce from tho
restraints which the State might choose to
impose upon it, which the commerce clause
in the constitution was intended to secure,
"The clause of the constitution giving Con-
gress the power to regulate commerce among
the States and with foreign Nations, as this
Court has said before, was among the most
important of the subjects which prompted
the formation OF the constitution and would
be very feeble and almost useless provision,
but poorly adapted to secure the entire
freedom of commerce among the States
which was deemed essential to a more perfect
union by the trainers of the constitution, il
ut every stage OF the transportation of goods
and chattels through the country the State
within whose limits Il part of the transporta-
tion must be done could impose regulations
concerning the price, compensation or taxa
tion, or any other restrictive regulation in
terfering with and seriously embarrassing
This commerce."