The Palatka daily news. (Palatka, Fla.) 1884-1888, 1888-01-31
DECISION OF The ALABAMA CASE.
ANOTHER PHASE OF THE STATES
RIGHTS QUESTION.
Properly an Act Of Legislatioa within the
scope Of the Admitted Powsr
Reserved To the states

WAsHISGToS, January 30.-A decision
was rendered by the United States Su-
preme Court to-day in the case of Joseph
J. Smith against the State Of Alabama,
which presents another phase Of the
question Of States rights. Smith, the
plaintiff in error, was q locomotive en-
gineer in the service OF the Mobile and
Ohj6 Railroad Company, and was en-
gagged in managing a locomotive which
regularly hauled trains in and out of the
State of Alabama, but not between points
wholly within that State. He was ar
rested for failure to provide himself with
an engineers license required by an act
Of the General Assembly Of Alabama,
approved February %. 1887. He sued
cut a writ of habeas corpus, and asked
to be released on the ground that the act
Of the General Assembly of Alabama
above referred to, is in violation of that
clause OF the United States Constitution
which confsrs upon Congress the power
to regulate the commerce among the
States.
This court in a long and careful
opinion by Justice Matthews, reviews
adjudged cases which relate to questions
of this nature, and then, referring to the
statute of Alabama whose validity is
called in question, says: ''It would in
deed be competent for Congress to legis-
late upon the subject matter Of this
statute and to prescribe the qualifica-
tions Of n locomotive engineer for en-
ployment by carriers engaged in foreign
or interstate commerce. 1t has legis-
lated upon similar subjects by prescrib-
ing the qualifications for pilots and engi
neers of steam vessels engaged in the
coasting trade and the navigation Of the
inland waters Of the United States while
engaged in commerce among the States,
and such legislation is undoubtedly justi-
fed on the ground that it is incident to
the power to regulate interstate COM
merce. The power might with equal
authority be exercised in prescribing the
qualifications for locomotive engineers
employed by railroad companies engaged
in the transportation of passengers and
goods among the States, and in that
case would supercede any con-
fiicting provisions ON the same subject
made by local authority, but the provi-
sions ON the subject contained in the
statute Of Alabama under considera-
ton are not regulations Of interstate
commerce. 1t is q misnomer to call
them such. Considered in themselves
they are parts Of that body Of local law
which properly governs the relation be-
tween carriers of passengers and mer-
chandise and the public who employ
them, which are not displaced until they
come in conflict with express enactments
of Congress in the exercise Of its
power over Ommerce, and which,
until 20 displaced according
to the evident intention of Congress, re-
main as law governing carriers in the
discharge OF their obligations, whether
engaged in purely internal commerce Of
the State, or in commerce between the
States.
"The court il therefore Of the opinion,
first, that the statute of Alabama, the
validity of which is under consideration,
is not, in its own nature, a regulation Of
piled as in this case.
Second, that it is properly an act Of
legislation within the scope of the ad-
mitted power reserved 10 the States to
regulate the relative rights and duties
of persons being and acting within its
operate so as to secure for the public
safety Of person and property.
Third, that 50 far as it affects trans
actions Of commerce between States it
does 20 only indirectly, incidentally and
remotely. and not 30 as to burden and
impede them, and in the particulars in
which it touches those transactions at
all it is not in conflict with any express
enactment Of Congress on the subject.
nor contrary to any intention Of Con-
gress to be presumed from its silence.
| "For these reasons the court holds
alleged to contravene the Constitution
| of the United States, to be valid law.
The judgement Of the Supreme Court oi
Alabama is affirmed"
Justice Bradley dissented and said
that he thought it was going too fal
to permit State to enact laws relating
to the subject over which exclusive
jurisdiction had been given to Con
gres, and to impose conditions upos
engineers from other States who wer
engaged in Interstate commerce