The great West. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1889-18??, 1890-02-28

reasonable rates for the Transports
ton of persons and property.
Now, what is q reasonable. rate
It might be said that q reasonable
rate is alawful or declared legal rate.
In the absence of any legislative dec
laration upon the subject, courts
may be called upon to determine
what is REASONABLE rate, but it being
particularly the province OF the legis-
iature to do so, the declaration OF
that body is conclusive upon both
parties and courts. Thus in Mum
vs.. Illinois, "a U. S. 113, the court
say:
Gas has already been shown, the
practice has been otherwise. In
countries where the common law pre-
walls, it has been customary from
time immemorial for the legislature
to declare what shall be reasonable
compensation under such circum-
stances, or, perhaps more properly
speaking, to fix maximum beyond
which any charge would beunreason-
able. Undoubtedly, in mere private
contracts, relating to matters in
which the public has no interest,
what is reasonable must be ascer-
tanned judicially. But this is be-
cause the legislature has no control
over such a contract. So, too, in
matters which do affect the public in
terest, and as to which legislative
control may be exercised, if there are
no statutory regulations upon the
subject the courts must determine
what is reasonable. The controlling
fact is the power to regulate at all.
If that exists, the right to establish
the maximum of charge, as one OF
the means of regulation, is implied.
In fact, the common law rule, which
requires the charge to be reasonable,
is itself a regulation as to price.
Without it the owner could make his
rates at will, and compel the public
to yield to his terms, or fore-go to
the use.
"But a mere common law regulation
of trade or business may be changed
by statute. A person has no prop
erty, no vested interest, in any rule
of the common law. That is only OF
the forms of municipal law, and one
is no more sacred than any other.
Rights of property which have been
created by the common law cannot
be taken away without due process
but the law itself, as q rule OF con-
duct, may be changed at the will, or
even at the whim, OF the legislature,
unless prevented by constitutional
limitations. Indeed, the great office
of statutes is to remedy defects in
the common law as they are devel-
oped, and to adapt it to the changes
of time and circumstances. To limit
the rate of charge for services rem
dered in a public employment, or for
the use of property in which the pub
lie has an interest, is only changing
a regulation which existed before. 1t
established no new principle in the
law but only gives a new effect to an
old one.
We know that this is power which
may be abused; but that is no argu-
ment against it's existence. For pro-
lection against abuses by legisla-
lures the people must resort to the
polls, not to the Courts.
In Peik VS.. Chicago, etc. Ry. Co.,
Id. 164. the Court, speaking Of this
particular question, say: "Where
property has been clothed with a
public interest, the legislature may
fix q limit to that which shall in law
be reasonable for it's use. This limit
binds the courts as we'll as the peo-
pie. If it has been improperly fixed,
the legislature, not the Courts, must
be appealed to for change.
In Chicago, etc. r. r. Co. VS.. Ack-
ley, 3D., 179, the legislature had
to recover for the transportation of
freight, the Court say: "But for
goods actually carried, the limit of
the recovery is that prescribed by the
statute"
Numerous decisions of State Courts
lily uO NC CiCCu " CuppOlo Ul1lO pIO-
position, but we believe the so-called
"Granger cases. fully establish the
rule that where a rate is fixed by the
legislature, such rate is of itself, and
because ofhaving been made the law
full rate, reasonable rate. Again,
even though the charter gave the
company the right to fix reasonable
rates this would not OF itself place a
limitation upon the power of the leg
lslature to fix rates, first, because the
intention OF the legislature to place
itself under a contract, a charter linn
itation, must be supported by strong
er proof than the use of such terms
and secondly, and for reason more
pertinent to the present discussion,
the rates fixed by the legislature, be-
ing by force of legislative declaration
lawful and reasonable, such act in no
way conflicts with any right that