The Daily clarion., 1886-02-24

declares that the maximum rates" pro-
vision n a eoairarf, and debars future Legs
latures from regulating the tariffs Of
charges, provided the railroad keep be-
low lhe maximum hxed in it, charter.
And tie Court asserts ils position to be
unassailable, for il SAYS: That this vas
valid contract by The State, obligatory
ani inyiolable ~ 81, we regard as settled,
authorilatiYely, by Federal and State de-
cisons too numerous for citation This
is ttr0ng language, and there ought . Re
cases 800 numerous for citation" 70 justi.
ly such emphatic language. Suppose |
aver here, that there Is not one ca5s to sup
port that eBphatic language? That
would be hard on the Supreme Court, il
true, you would say. | am not going 10
be rash, quite 10 the verge Of luuacy. |
do aver thls, however: The supreme Court
Of the United States declared, 81 late a.
May Z, 1883, it unnecessary to decide
whether one Legislature has the power 20
bind succeeding Legislatures By contract
10 that eiisct''-that is, t9 tx rates ot
cnarses.-See 1OS Z S. Reports, page o23.
On the same day, the same Court said. IN
httAktlNl kAHtt ilfAIlEI NaAt f1tatE VA III
inois has entered into a contract With a
railroad corporation not TO exercise the
legislative power 10 regulate charges"
ut ia not necessary 10 decide in this
case, any more than IL was in the other"
See los L. 5. Reports, page 5i2. So the
question stood, IN the Supreme Court OF
the United States, az late as May 7, 1883
How many cases too numerous for cita-
lion" have been decided, in Federal aud
State Courts siace that date? | do assert,
and that without fear Of contradiction,
that the case oil the Mississippi Valley
EsllroNSj'in the Supreme Court Of Aiissis-
sippi, stands alone, the one case, in a court
OF last resort, in which such language is
used in reference to a public corporation,
like railroad, where the question Of the
police power OF the State is involved.
As ~ private corporations, like the
Dartmouth College, it has been decided in
cases 100 numerous for citation" that the
Legislature may MAKE contract and bind
future legislatures Bu; how many cases
have been decided that support our Su-
preme Court, since May 7, 1888? an
swer: Not one. But the United States
Supreme Court non says it is an open ques-
tion. Whilst the Mississippi cases were late
ly being argued, in that Court, counsel re-
marked that it was believed that the Court
had purposely left the question undecided,
up to that time. Chief Justice Waite
remarked, that it was true-that the court
had purposely refrained FROM deciding
that very question; because it was not
necessary to decide it, in any case that had
h.f,ra tb., | ats fl,;a
lact-an authority. SO the matter stands,
30 far as the U. s. Supreme Court is con-
cerned.
Does not the doctrine of maximum
rates" look like legal legerdemain Let
US dssect it. The most universally recog-
nized power OF the State the most valuable
part OF the police power OF the State, is
that Of controlling the charges of common
carriers. Their charges must be reasonable.
The doctrine is that of the English speak
ing race. Then, suppose charter which
says that the railroad can fix rates, pro-
vided that Il shall not charge more than
fifty dollars on one bale Of cotton, carried
u hundred miles. Does it not strike US a.
absurd, that such proviso as that, should
have the force and effect OF contract, and
thus take away the power of the State to
perform its duty of protecting the citizens
from extorlion, by the common carrier !?
You admit, that when the charter allows
the railroad 80 fr and regulate" its charges,
it is all the time implied, that the charges
must be reasonable but, il you add, pro-
vided, the charges shall not exceed fifty
dollars a bale on cotton, that is a contract /;
and however unreasonable the maximum
may be, there is such magic in those words,
that the police power, inherent in the
State, stands paralyzed, and it is no longer
able to protect the weak against organized
robbery. Such doctrine is not supported
by reason or authority. All the wiggish
learning in the books can not obscure the
judgment Of COMMON SENSE.