St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1888-08-13
IOwA.s RAILROAD FIGHT.

The great legal fight which is now
going Oh in Iowa between the railroad
companies on the one side and the
state authorities on the other, is attract
ing the attention of the entire country,
not only because of the intense bitter
ness with which the war is waged, but
also because it is well understood that
the results of the contest will have a
decided bearing on the railroad IegiSla-
ton of the future in this country. 1t is
probably because the state laws regula-
ting railroad transportation are more
stringent in Iowa than in any other
state, that the railroads contrived to
make this state the scene of their great
battle against railroad legislation.
Railroad managers have come to the
conclusion that their corporations are
entitled to more liberties than either the
federal or the state governments are
disposed to concede to them. They are
impressed with the idea that the rail-
road business should be entitled to the
same latitude that any private business
is permitted to enjoy. Upon the prin-
ciple that the more freedom granted to
commerce the more prosperous are the
conditions of trade, they assume that
railroading can never become success
full as strictly business enterprise, un-
til it is relieved from the restrictions
which congress and the state legi Sla
lures are continually imposing upon it.
Looking at the question from the stand
point of the railroad people, it is easy to
see why they are so earnest in their de-
termination to make the bitter fight they
have inaugurated.
But there is another standpoint from
which the question can be viewed, and
1t the railroad managers would take
more frequent observations from this
outlook there would probably be less
litigation of this character. They m ust
remember that railroading is business
sui generis. 1t is unlike any other bus
iness in that it is purely the creature
of the public breath. If the state of
Iowa has the right to control and utterly
wipe out business which was in exist
ence long before there were any Ameri-
can states, then, surely, it has right to
place restrictions upon a business
which derives its existence from the
Legislative power of the states. The
supreme court of the United States hav-
ing affirmed the right of Iowa, or any
other state to regulate the liquor bust
ness, we fail to see what hope the rail-
roads have in carrying their case into
the courts. If it be true, as they affirm,
that the railroad legislation of Iowa
is detrimental to their business,
or even if it should result in
the destruction of all railroad property
fin the state, we still fail to see how the
federal courts can interpoSe to prevent
the state of Iowa from exercising its
sovereign power even though, by ex-
IerciSing that power, valuable property
Interests are destroyed. When the
people of Iowa adopted prohibition
every one recognized the fact that the
effect of their action was injurious to
and in many instances absolutely de-
structive of the property interests of
the liquor dealers and diStillerS. And
yet the federal government dared not
question the sovereign right of the state
to control its internal affairs according
to its own pleasure.
SO we apprehend that when final de-
clSOn has been reached In the litigation
now pending between the state of Iowa
and the railroad companies, the SOW
ereignty of the state will be undis-
turbed, and the railroads will be COM
PEELED to submit to just such restrictions
and limitations as the people of Iowa,
through their legislature, choose to i'm
pose. 1t is not worth while to enter
into discussion of the equities of the
contest. So far as the power of the
court is concerned, it makes no differ
ence whether the railroad laws of Iowa
are just or unjust in their operations,
for there can be no appeal from the
verdict of sovereign. The people of
Iowa, if they saw proper to exercise
their sovereign power to that extreme,
could prohibit railroads from being built
or operated within the limits of their
state.