The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1889-02-14


! By Mr.. Asberry-Resolution to amend
section 20, article 8, of the Constitution.
The house refused to concur in senate
amendments to substitute house bill No.
10 amending article 4S6 of the Revised
Statutes.
/ Substitute senate bill, amending article
| 19l of the Revised Statutes as to garnish-
ment, passed.
House bill amending the law as to ap-
polntment of receivers in suits against
railroads and other corporations was en-
crossed.
THE RAILWAY COMMISSION BILL.
Substitute house bill 1914, for regulating
railroads and creating railway commits
sion, was taken up as the special order.
The majority report in favor of the bill
was presented by Mr.. Brown, of Grsyson,
chairman of the committee on internal
improvements.
minority report is signed by Messrs.
Gresham and Hamblen, of the committee.
The general features of the substitute
have been published.
Mr.. Brown, of Grayson, spoke for two
hours, making powerful argument in its
favor. 1t was bill of great Importance,
in the investigation of which we should be
careful and patient. Such radical changes
as it contemplated should not be made ex-
cept for good and sufficient reasons, and,
as chairman of the committee which pre-
sented the substitute, he proposed to give
what he considered satisfactory reasons
for adopting the substitute.
To do this he would endeavor to meet
the objections made to the bill, in dis
cussing which there should be neither
passion nor prejudice. "We should recog-
nize the fact that our interests were in
common and that injury to any one of
these interests will have bad effect upon
all, and ills" he said, "because believe the
present condition of things does infict
| injury upon some of our interests to the
detIiment of others that l feel it is
proper for this legislature to adopt this
bill as q curative measure. Let US then
meet and fairly consider the objections
presented. As take it, there can be no
man here who desires to support the bill
except upon the high ground that it is to
the advantage of the whole state. Mere
fanciful wrong should have no place here.
"Thls is no new question which confronts
US; therefore we are at liberty to review
the objections heretofore made to the pas
sage of similar bills, as we may expect
the same tactics as was used in previous
legislature, when the state engineer bill
was substituted for a commission bill.
We may expect some one to offer
some such plausible measure as the
usual tactics of the opposition.
Some of these objections are vague and
peculiar. But first it is objected that this
measure is not constitutional. There are
two phases to this objection. Some claim
that it involves legislative power and
cannot be delegated to a commission.
Others think it is class of powers that
might be delegated hut for certain pecu-
liar features of the Constitution. Then
there is a question as to the expense
and expedienoy of commission which
generally comes from our railroad friends.
This do not consider valid objection
because commission will relieve the rail-
roads from trouble and expense. 1t is
contended also that if we adopt this meas
ure, capital will not come here and rail
road enterprises will be discouraged. The
injustice of Texas to railroads is sung too
as an illiad of woes.
GAS to the objection on constitutional
grounds, believe it is generally based
upon peculiar questions of constitutional
construction"
In arguing this Mr.. Brown read from
the Fifth Federal Reporter, from Judge
Woods decision in the case of Tilley VS..
Savannah and Florida Railway company.
He referred also to the case of the Georgia
Railway company VS.. Smith. Also, re-
ferred to two recent decisions of Judge
Brewer.
"Even supposing," Mr.. Brown con-
tinued, "thRt section 2, article 10, of the
Constitution was expunged, how many
I men who are representatives here would
assert that the legislature had no power to
fix railroad rates? l presume there are
none. On the other hand, some have grave
doubts as TO the construction of the Con-
sttution, even though they desire com
mission"
Mr.. Brown deliberately discussed the
limitations and powers of the Constitution,
citing and comparing the several sections
bearing upon each other. The Constitu-
tion of 1870 was mandatory to grant all
manner of aid to railroads. The legisla-
ture, however, went more into detail than
was prudent. If that Constitution did not
CONFER certain powers rs 10 rallrOauS IL
certainly did not limit the powers of the
legislature. 1t simply commanded that
we shall take hold of this matter. The
legislature having the power to regulate
railroads, has the right to use the neces-
sary means to do this. There must
be express limitations in words or abso-
lutte prohibition to exclude other means
Thus the Constitution was mandatory to
use the proper means as well as to exer-
else the right to regulate which resides in
the Legislature. Here in one section of
the Constitution which he read is the right
to regulate, and here IN another, taken in
connection with it, is command to exer-
else the means resulting under that power.
There is no question that the power is
there unless there is some limitation. We
are not here to hunt difficulties or create
scarecrOws and bugaboos. To prevent
frauds and corruption it is our duty to
give liberal construction to the Consti-
tuition.
Mr.. Brown cited the Constitution of,