The McCook tribune., 1897-01-22
Maximum Freight Law,

II is provided in section 4, of article II,
OF the constitution, that railways here
uofore constructed, or that may hero
after be constructed in this state, are
thereby declared public highways, and
shall be free to all persons for the trans
pcrtaion of their persons and property
thereon, under such regulations as may
he prescribed by law, and the legislature
may, from time to time pass such laws
establishing reasonable maximum rates
OF charges for the transportation of pas
sengerS and freight on the different rail-
roads in this state. The liability OF rail-
way corporations as common carriers
shall never be limited"
Section provides: The legislature
eia. pass laws TO correct abuses and
prevent unjust discrimination and eXtor-
tion in all charges Of express, telegraph
and railroad companies in this state, and
enforce such laws by adequate penalties
10 the extent, If necessary for that pur-
pose. of forfeiture Of their property and
franchises"
Under the constitutional power thus
conferred, efforts have been made from
time TO time by the different legislatures
10 enact laws to establish reasonable
maximum rates and to prevent discrimi-
nation and abuses ITO the patrons Of such
roads. The legislature Of 1898 enacted a
IraE I'M freight rate law which was ap-
rrcN by the governor, and thereby be-
ca one of the laws of the state. The
enfLsce ceTnent of this law was resisted by
different railway companies, and a suft
instituted to prevent the board of trans
portation from enforcing the provisions
of ;::e act. = trial in. a federal district
court resulted adversely to the state, and
The last legislature made suitable pro-
visions for the prosecution of a writ of
error from the judgment of the district
court to the supreme court of the United
States. 1t was presumed at that time
that the case could be taken on appeal
or error TO the supreme court. and there
disposed of in a short time and the valid
3ty of the act in question be determined.
An argument of the case was had in the
supreme court in the year 1885. a re-
argument afterwards was ordered. This
has not yet been done. For some reason,
TO ne unknown, a stipulation was entered
unto between those representing the state
and the attorneys for the railroads, post
poning hearing On a motion TO advance
qfle case for reargument until some time
during the present month, and it seems
nov hardly reasonable to expect final
decision on this important question until
some time during the spring months.
I am unable to lead myself 70 believe
that the delays occasoned in the final
hearing of this case are at all necessary
bu; on the contrary. am strongly i'm
pressed with the conviction that the case.
being of so much public importance
ought to have been finally disposed of
long ere ta;s. It seems to me that the
grave questions involved are Of sufficient
-;Ti1cr.ance to warrant an order of ad-
vsncemeEt by the tribunal hearing the
case and a decision at the earliest cp-
portunfty consistent with its proper con-
stderation by those who nave 70 pass
upon tle legal questions involved. 1t Is
80 be hoped jnat final and speedy hear
ing VII be obtained at an early date,
and thus enable the people of the state
to ascertain what, if any. further CT diff
fe-ert legislation may be required in Or
der to carry cut the intention Of the pro-
visions Of tne constitution just quoted.
Cr,.il the case is finally determined. it
would seem that nothing further in the
way OF enauting law establishing rea-
sonahle maximum freight charges by the
legislature can with safety be attempted.