Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-02-21
Observation-Disclosures p. 1888.
Interstate Commerce.

ilkN4 -NtNlt AtlAAss4tANN-
The Supreme Court of the United
States made the United States nation
instead Of a copfedcracy of equal
States. The people of the northern
States especially were gradually iHdociri-
mated into the theory that the States
stood TO the United States as the cOun-
ties to the States-to use PATRICK
HENRY's illustration. The war between
the States so resulted rs to leave no
doubt whatever on this point The
present condition Of things is, therefore,
a growth, not creation--it is the pro-
duet Of evolution, not a condition Of
things forcSeen or desired by the trainers
OF the Federal Constitution.
The Interstate Commerce Commission
promises to follow IN the footsteps OF the
Supreme Court Of the United States,
or rather to initiate the example of this
august tribunal. Congress passed a law
last year which was nominally intended
to regulate nothing but interstate com
merce but the interstate commissioners
seem TO have made up their minds that
the new law covers commerce within the
several States rs well as commerce be-
tween the several States.
Weprinted on Saturday last telegram
stating that the Interstate Commerce
Commission had rendered a decision
the effect of which was to give to the
commission jurisdiction i'll the case of Il
railroad chartered 10y the Legislature
Of Tennessee and lying wholly within
that State The road is a short one, but
that fact has no bearing upon the case.
The railroad company, it was stated,
"never owned any rolling-stock nor
operated its road. One implication Is
that if the Tennessee company will pur-
chase its own rolling-stock or operate
its own railroad then the jurisdiction
If the Interstate Commerce Commission
Will be ousted, as indeed We suppose it
would he. The Tennessee company is
tie Coal-Creek and New-Riyer Railroad
Company. The claim is that Its road is
used and operated rs means of con-
Quoting Interstate traffic in coal by the
companies owning connecting inter-
State roads, and is therefore one OF the
facilities and instumcntalltes OF inter-
State commerce, and as such is subject
70 regulation 10y Congress. We are not
at all prepared to deny that the decision
is correct We only refer to it as an
evidence that the work of Capitalization
is not yet finished. and as foreshadowing
the control by Congress at an early day
OF all intra-State commerce as well as all
Interstate commerce.
In our issue of Sunday last another
and if possible still more significant pro-
ceeding was reported. G. G. mccain,
auditor OF the Interstate Commerce
Commission, had issued the following
circular to railroads located wholly in one
State or Territory
Roads located wholly in one State
or Territory which interchange freight
or passenger traffic with connections to
or from points outside of such State or
Territory on through tickets or bills of
lading should file tariffs covering such
traffic with the commission. If such
through rates are made by the addition
OF local rates to the rates Of connecting |
roads such local tariffs should be filed |
with the commission, together with
AH.t fh,..rr, mt -Gsota
are made by adding such local rates to |
the rates of the carrier (naming IT. with |
which the connection is made. If joint |
rates are made on any basis other than |
by the addition Of local rates to the |
through rates of connecting carriers |
tariffs showing such rates should be filed /
with the commission covering all inter /
State business transacted Hereunder.
This squints awfully at usurpation. |
II a railroad wholly i'll Virginia may be |
compelled to "file tariffs covering |
its connections to or from points outside /
OF said State. then there is not much Of /
State control left The only condition
upon which roads wholly within one
State may be allowed to manage their
own business under State laws would |
seem TO be the total abolition of all /
through rates. The companies must re-
turn TO the practice of railroads forty
years or more ago, and compel passen-
gers to procure new tickets wherever
they reach new railroad.
Tho Virginia Legislature has now
before it a bill purporting to be an intra-
State commerce bill In view of the facts
we have just recited. it would be well for
our Legislators TO scrutinize closely all
the provisions Of the pending bill, and
not leave in it any that may be said 10
belong rather TO an interstate commerce
act than to an intra-State commerce act.
The Interstate commerce act as far as
Il touches these cases reads as follows:
]. 1.-THE provisions of this act shall
apply TO any common carrier en-
gagged III the transportation OF passengers
OF property wholly by railroad. or partly
by railroad aud partly by water, when
both are used under common control
for a continuous carriage
from one State or Territory to
any other State or Territory Of the
United States. " PrOuided, hOwcUer,
that the provisions OF this act shall not
apply to the transportation Of passengers
or property wholly within one
State"
Ia the case first above mentioned the
Virginia railroad and the Tennessee rail-
road were under "common control"
But in the case Of q railroad wholly
within Virginia and not under the same
control with one outside the State, it
would seem that the Interstate Commits
sion has DO right to compel such road to
furnish copies Of its tariffs.
-s--------~---