Hutchinson gazette. [volume] (Hutchinson, Kan.) 1895-1902, 1897-09-02

VI Ouo OOdFu lhoO year was SIMPLY du
injunction to prevent the roads from
changing rates which the board in the
first instance had no right or power to
make.
"Did the railroads obey it?' asked
Judge Randolph.
81 will get to it in a minute and read
you what was done" MI Waggener
said.
he read the record, but Judge Ran
dolph insisted on his question.
Mr.. Waggener then said the railroads
did not change their rates at that time.
He then argued that as the board had
not fixed rates, all the complaints fled
last year or this year are still pending
and will not be acted upon until Sep
TENDER 81.
"They only ask for temporary Or
der" Waggener declared. '"They don't
ask for permanent injunction.
eyes we do" put in Joe Waters.
'That we be forever restrained?''
asked Waggener.
"Yes."
''Then so much the worse for you
The law gives the power to fxrates to
the railroad board, not to the courts
ATTORNEY GENERAL BoYLE's ARGUMENT.
When the hearing was resumed at
1880 last night Attorney General Boyle,
speaking for the state, disclosed that
the only inhibition the constitution and
courts haYe put on the power of the
state in fixing rates is that they must
be reasonable. He claimed that the
state, either by legislature or by
board of railroad commissioners, has
the absolute, unquestionable power of
regulation when it deals with the quasi
public interests. Reasonableness of a
rate he said, can only be determined
by considering the interests of both
sides. What is reasonable and fair to
the railroads and what is fair to the
people are both to be considered. He
admitted that the law creating the
state board of railroad commissioners
has its weaknesses, but when the board
has on complaint of shippers fixed
schedule. that schedule is as absolute
and binding unless it be unreasonable,
conhscatory or in violation of the con-
stitution, as any act of the legislature
itself.
'"These men, Mr.. Boyle said, do not
question that these allegations are true
They do not answer the assertion that
these rates are not just They come
here and question your authority on
technlcality."
Mr.. Boyle read the law which gives
the state board of railroad commission.
ers general control over the railroad
and express companies of the state.
He dwelt on che fact that the law gives
the board power to say that unreason-
able charges cannot be made. That
the old rates were not unreasonable
was, he said, proved by the fact that
they had stood for twenty-five years,
and when an attempt to change them
was objected to sixteen months ago the
railroads acquiesced in the order of the
board.
Answering Mr.. Waggener's argument
that the state was not interested, he
showed by the statutes that public
officials of townships, cities or counties
have power to make complaint when
the public good requires it. The state
can and should act when the public
good is involved.
JUDGE Horizons DECISION QUOr&D.
Judge Horizons decision that the &C
ton of the board constitutes prima facie
evidence of the reasona bleness or nm
of a rate was cited by
the attorney general who declared that
the board had decided the dollars per
hundred pounds rate against which the
injunction is asked is unreasonable, and
that following the supreme courts de-
cision the courts have power to enforce
the order.
The attorney general denied that the
shippers have an adequate remedy at
law; to avail themselves of the benefit
Of the law providing penalties for over
charging they must bring a separate
suit for every overcharge. That would
clog the dockets of the courts The
themselves have been the
first to ask for laws to prevent multi
plicity of suits. The federal courts
have interfered to prevent states from
enforcing laws, that are believed to be
unconstitutional, against corporations
until the constitutionality of the law
can be determined. Cannot, "he said,
'the state stey in and say of a consti-
tional law, you shall not disobey it
until we know whether it is unreason-
lble?" He cited the stock yards case,
N which Mr.. Waggener's firm, Wag-
yener, Horton & Orr, had secured re-
,training order to tie up the laws of the
state of Kansas because of the laws |