The people's journal. (Pickens, S.C.) 1891-1903, 1896-02-13

in view Of the fact that the Supreme
Court of tho United States had al.
ready decided that the commission had
such powers.
Mr.. Weston in speaking against the
measure, said that in the lirst place it
proposed to take away from the rail
roads tho power to appeal from any
decision of the board. This was un-
just. Railroads should have the Same
right to appeal to q court of justice as
any individual.
Mr.. Shuman favored striking out
the enacting clause OF the bill. In a
dispute hetwoen railroads and the
commission this bill would prevent
them from appealing to the courts OF
the countryside tribunals established
to decide any such controversies us
may arise.
Mr.. Shuman held that we had all the
laws necessary now to carry out the
torms of the proposed bill. He re-
viewed at some longth the railroad
law and spoke Of the fact that although
still the Legislature in legislating for
the whole people could not in u spirit
OF vindictiveness pass such an unjust
and unconstitutional law.
MIR. Haselden in speaking In favor
of his bill said that being plain farm
or he did not feel equal to answering
the arguments Of the attorneys who
opposed him. They argue that the
bin Is not necessary. II 1t Is not will
it be hardship on the railroads
Next it is claimed they are not allowed
General is instructed by the bill to 60
to the courts in order to forfeit the
charter. II we are destroying or con-
iscating their property then 1t Is
shown in the courts and the Attorney
General fails in his efforts. Tho rail-
roads have withdrawn their opposi-
tion, but it was only after they had to
do so and they saw that the people
would throttle these monsters.
Mr.. Haselden thon quoted compara-
tive figures to show that railroads
charged $17 pcr car load in this State
when in other Southern States it is
only $l4. The railroads are lodging.
They claim to have submitted to the
terms Of tho commission, but as a mat
ter OF fact the rates are about as high
now as over before. When it comes to
paying taxes they make af1idavits one
way when it suits them and another
way when it suits them. This measure
Is only intended to give the commits
sion power to enforce their rulings.
II we don't give them this power why
| h"fo Olo COAIuibSlOn duu pby buSlT
salary? Why not abolish the COM
Mr.. ThurmOnd thought the bill
ought to pass because we need some
radical legislation along this line
When rates are fixed, the railroads
keep on appealing even to the United
States Supreme Court. What We
want is some prompt, sovereign
remedy. 1t IL not intended to keep
from the railroads any Of the rights
now had by them. 1t will only compel
them to come to time quickly andSre.
spect the rights OF the people.
Mr.. Wyche said he disliked to op-
pose tho bill, but 1t seemed to him
it was putting too much power In the
hands OF three mon. They should have
some court of appeal-say the General
Assembly. 1t did not look to him to
be just.
Mr.. Duncan said tho plan now used
by the railroads was to apply for on
Injunction. Under this bill they will
have first to prove that the rates made
by the commission arc unjust and will
not compel the State to do 80 as at
present.
Mr.. Patton gave it as his opinion as
q lawyer that tho roads which did not
put in the ratios Of the commission
|
He didn't believe the bill was consti-
tutional, but, leaving that out, he
thought 1T most unjust in that no rule
should be made to apply to corpora
tions that didn't apply to individuals
MIR. l.. j. Williams said that he
would never raise his voice against
railroads, but he would not sit here
and SEQ them run roughshod over
South Carolina. 1t was either repeal
the commission or the railroads. Laws
are made for individuals and If they
are outraged they have right to ap-
peal to the courts. AS he understood
the law it was provided that the rates
OF the commission should go into Of
feet and If they could show that they
were unjust they had the right to 90
| TO the courts.
Mr.. Patton in answer to several
side questions by Messrs. Thurmond
and RainsfOrd said he was not opposed
to the commission, but he said that he
didn't believe in forbidding the roads
appealing to the courts, the right al
lowed the humblest negro.
Mr.. Skinner favored the bill and
thought itgave the railroads all rights
OF appeal.
MIR. Watson said the question re-.
solved itself into this: Shall tho
CFeaIOf CFetto DlSSor aH8lr IMAM IT.
self? If charters are granted by the
General Assembly should 1t not have
power to control thom II tho rail-
roads would recognize the rights of
our commission and our own courts
and not disregard tho rights of the
people he would bo willing to meet
thom half waJ.
Mr.. Bacot said tho object OF the
comm ssion rightly was to control and
regulate the roads but not to crush
them. But this bill with one blow
would destroy them, IL thoy should
disregard tho regulations, and tho
roads would have no hearing In the
courts.
Mr.. Magill called for tho previous
question. On vote the House re.
fused to strike out tho enacting wol ds.
Mr.. Shuman offered tho following
amendment Amend by inserting on
line 8 of section 2, aftoc the word
charter," the following: Provided,
That any railroad against which such
proceedings havo been instituted may
prevent such forfeiture by showing to