The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1897-03-17
THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO
FIX RAILROAD, TELEGRAPH'
TELEPHONE AND EXPRESS
CHARGES.

has been so explicitly anu Iepe"'N1'
cided by the Supreme Court Oh uhe
United States that it would require elther
preot cheek or great ignorance for cor
poration "heelers" to assert the con-
trary From immemorial time the leg
islature has regulated tolls by public grlst
mills and similar matters. AS to rail-
roads the right to regulate their charges
was still stronger because they not only
are iucorporated and have life breathed
into them by legislative act, but they
could not locate their lines except Tor the
legislative grant of right way over 9TH
or people's lands under the power of
Eminent Domain. This could not DE
exercised for private purposes since prl-
vate property can not be taken except
for public use" Consequently, the u. >.
Supreme Court has pointedly said The
main object in chartering and building
railroads is for public purposes, the public
benefit and convenience. The private
gain of the stockholders is purely Incl
dental" How far the manipulators OF
railroads and legislatures have gotten
from this plain statement of the truth!
The first real struggle over legislative
power to fix railroad charges was i'll Wis
cousin in 1873, nearly 4 quarter of a
century ago. The opinion of Chief JUS
tice Ryan, of Wisconsin, then fixed, be-
yond cavil. the power of the Legislature
to prescribe railroad charges and this de-
cision was. on writ of error. affirmed by
the Supreme Court of the United States.
Since then numerous decisions of the
highest court of the Union have uni
formly sustained that right and extended
it to all similar corporations serving the
public, as telegraphs, telephones, eX'
press companies, grain elevators and the
like. 4 determined stand was taken
against the legislative regulation of the
charges of grain elevators on the ground
that they were private, and not public
agencies, but in Budd V. New York and
several other cases the same high court
has affirmed the legislative right to regu
late elevator charges. In Il late case, the
Texas Supreme Court has sustained the
right of the State Railroad Commission
to regulate the charges of the Cotton
Congresses, indeed they stand on the
same footing as grain elevators
The only question is not as TO the pow
er of the Legislature (either directly or
through Commission) to regulate the
charges of these corporations but how far
the courts could exercise it. 1t would
logically seem that if, as is conceded, the
legislature has the power to regulate
rates it is an interference by Il co-ordi-
nate branch of the government for the
judicial department to attempt to regn
late the legislative department in the ex-
ercise of its powers. The courts have
seen this and have only gone to this ex
tent that rates fixed by the Legislative
authority, which will give some compen
sation, however small, TO the owners of
railroad property, can not be held by the
courts to be insufficient, but when the
rates prescribed will not pay any compcn-
sation whatever to the owners. the
courts have power to interfere" This is
the conclusion in the case of Chicago v
Dey, 80 Fed. Rep. and Inters. Com
Rep, summing up the authorities. This
rule leaves large power to the legislature
and would sanction statutes which cut
down railroad net profits to a mere pit
lance. Yet it is hard to see how any
in effect deny regulation of such rates.
or else leave little more than the shadow
of such power in the legislature, while
the real power is assumed by the courts,
though no right minded legislator would
vote for reductions that did not leave i
fair margin of profits for the owners of
the road. Accordingly the u. S. Su-
preme Court in an Arkansas case sus-
tanned the statute enacting rates which
profits. And in another case where no
net profits were left, the same court de-
clined to interfere unless it afiimatively
appeared that the road was not extra
vagantly managed nor exorbitant sala-
ries paid. Rates of common carriers
were regulated, where their business was
done by stage coach and concerned the
public even less than do many other
kinds of modern business.
In the annotations to the late case of
Winchester V. Croxton, 33 J.. X. A, we
are informed the whole subject of legis-
lative power to fix tolls, rates and
prices is fully considered and the kinds
of business subject to public regulation
as to prices are stated.
Rich people are rusnlng TO buy large