Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1886-01-05
SUPREME COURT RULINGS
NiISSISSIPPFS RAILROAD COM
MISSION SUSTAINED.

WASHINGTON, Jan. A decision was
rendered by the Supreme Court to-day
in the case Of John M. Stone and others,
composing the Railroad Commission of
the State of Mississippi, against the
Farmers Loan and Trust Company, on an
appeal from the Circuit Court of the Dis
trict of Mississippi. This is one of the
Mississippi Railroad Commission cases.
1t was brought by the Farmers Loan and
Trust Company of New York to enjoin
the Railroad Commission Of Mississippi
from enforcing against the Mobile and
Ohio Railroad Company the provisions
OF the statute of Mississippi, passed in
1884, to provide for the regulations of
freight and passenger rates on railroads
in the State and for other purposes.
EFFECT OF THE STATUTE.
The statute declares that railroads in
the State are public highways, over which
all persons have equal rights, and makes
any discrimination in rates penal or
Tense. 1t further provides for the appoint
ment of a Board of Commissioners, and
confers upon it the power of revising the
tariff of charges and of exercising GER
tain degree of supervision over roads.
Railroad companies are required to make
certain reports periodically to the COM
missiOners. The officers of the roads are
made liable to fine for violation OF or
noncompliance with the provisions of
the act, which fine may be collected
through the courts.
PROGRESS OF THE FIGHT.
This and certain other acts relating to
the ohartering and control Of the railroads
of the State are cited at length in the
opinion. The Circuit Court rendered a
a niiOpyinn a
that decree the commissioners appealed.
The argument IN support OF the decree is
that the statute under which the commits
sioners are to act Impairs obligation of
the charter contract of the company, that
it is a regulation of commerce among
States, that it denies the company equal
protection of the laws, and deprives 1t of
its property without due process of law,
that it conters both legislative and judi
cial powers upon the commission, and is
thus repugnant to the constitution OF
Mississippi. and that it is void on its face
by reason Of its Inconsistencies and uD-
certainties.
THE COURTS FINDING.
The Supreme Court finds that the char
ter of the 9mpany contains no contract,
obligation o. which is in any way impair
edby the statute under which the COM
missiOners are to act. Ittinds that the
commission is IN express terms prohibit
ed by the act of the State Legislature
from interfering with the charges of the
company for transportation Of person or |
property through Mississippi from one
State to another. The commissioners
have as yet undertaken nothing in con-
4 lct with the constitution of the United
States. The great purpose, it says. of the
statute in question, is TO fix the maximum
OF charges and TO regulate in some mat
ters Of police nature the use of the rail-
coads in the State.
DECLARED CONSTITUTIONAL.
In us general scope it is constitutional.
and it applies equally to all persons or
corporations owning or operating rail-
roads in the State. The Supreme Court
of the State of Mississippi has already
declared that the statute is not Fepug-
nant to the State constitution, and in this
opinion the Supreme Court of the United
states cOncurs. SIT is difficult to under
stand" the opinion says, in conclusion,
precisely on what ground we are ex-
pected to decide this statute is
so inconsistent and uncertain as
to render it absolutely void on
its face. The argument on this
branch of the controversy contains much
that might have been useful if addressed
TO the Legislature while considering the
bill before its final enactment, but we
md nothing in 1t 10 show that
toe statute as IL row stands is
altogether void and imperative. When
the commission has acted and proceed
! lngs are had TO infOrce what they have
I 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 whole
the statute is invalid. The decree of the
Circuit Court was reversed and the cause
remanded with instructions TO dismiss the
bill. Tne opinion was delivered by the
Chief Justice.
DISSENTING OPINIONS.
Justices Field and Harlan dissented
from certain OF the opinions expressed by
the court In the case, but cOncurred in the
Judgment. Justice Blatehford did not sit
in this ease or take any part i'm its deeis-
lon. In two other cases, those OF John M.
Stone, ct al, the Railroad Commissioners
Of Mississippi, appellants, VS.. the Illinois
Central Railroad Company, and the same
appellants vs.. the New Orleans and North
western Railroad Company, decisions
were rendered in accordance with the de-
cision in Stone VS.. the Farmers Loan and
Trust Company. Justice Blatchford took
no part in these cases.
MOBILES RAILROAD BONDS.
Other decisions were rendered by the
court as follows:
No. 90. Port Of Mobile against Henry
Watson.
The city OF Mobile IN its corporate name !
issued bonds TO aid the construction OF |
a railroad, and made provision for a |
special annual tax 10 be applied 20 its |
bonds. The Legislature Of Alabama in |
1879 passed an act TO yacate and annul |
the charter Of the city Of Mobile. and on |
the same day passed another act 10 in |
corporate part or Mobile, comprising the |
chief part OF the territory and all the |
taxable property formerly included, |
within the limits Of the city. Mr.. w ats0n |
became owner Of some OF the bonds issued |
by the city, and sued the port Of Mobile !
for their payment.
JUDGMENT OBTAINED.
He obtained judgment, but no prop
erty could be found upon which 10 levy. !
He then prayed for a writ OF mandamus |
10 compel the municipal authorities OF
the port 70 assess and levy a tax for the |
satisfaction Of his judgment. The author |
iues denied that they we're the Successors
OF the government of the city and bound /
Tor the clty's debts. Tho Circuit Court !
issued rs mandamus that the tax b. |
levied and the money collected 10 satisfy /
Mr " ai60n's judgment, with interest |
This judgment d. affirmed. The SUI |
promo Court is Of the opinion that /