The Norfolk Virginian. [volume] (Norfolk, Va.) 186?-189?, 1898-03-08
LAW VS.. CONSTITUTION
Justice hrIan Decides Against Nebraska
Statute
FIXING RAILROAD FREIGHT RATES
Hon. W. J. Bryan Was Counsel In
This Gaso-M uch Int crest VI nnif cyt-
ed Owing TO Probable Influence
ON Legislation I'm Other states
CnaDot FIX Maximum Hates.


Jstce Harlan, in the Supreme Court
to-day. rendered an opinion in the
Nebraska maximum freight rate case,
holding the Nebraska law to be CON
trary to the 14th amendment In that II
authorized the taking of property with
out due process OF law.
Justice Harlan's opinion affirmed
the opinion Of the Circuit Court of
Appeals for the Eighth Circuit which
was against the maximum freight rate
law and favorable to the railroads.
This case was instituted to test the
validity Of law passed by the Ne
braska Legislature in 1S93 prescribing
the maximum rates for the transporta-
lion of freight by railroads within the
state. The act applies specifically 10
freight whose transit begins and ends
IN the State, and there was no effort in
IT'S enactment TO control Interstate
freight.
The law was attacked on the ground
or its constitu.ional.ty. The case has
been twice argued in the Supreme
Court Hon. w. j. Bryan appearing us
one of the counsel for the State at the
last hearing. Much interest has been
manifested in the decision ever since
the case was docketed because of the
probable influence a result favorable
to the law would have had upon lcgis-
lotion in other States.
In his opinion Justice Harlan first
detailed the facts relating to the pas
sage Of the act by the Nebraska Leg
isiatre in 1898, ana then skctched
briefly its provisions. saying that
among others of its provisions was one
Oix-f, ai,,t,, A.,
on the railroads of the State and TO
classify frc!ghts. He .hen ;cok up in
order the points at issue between the
State and the railroad companies
He quoted number Of opinions ana
said that in View Of the adiudications
the following principles must be re-
gardcd as settled
IA railroad corporation is n person
within the meaning of the fourteenth
amendment declaring that no State
shah deprive any person of property
without due process of law. nor dcAy
any person wi;hin It's jurisdiction the
equal protection If the !lwa
"A State enactment or regulation
made under the authority of a State
enactment. establishing such rates for
the transport ton of persons or prom
cray by railroad rs will not admit of
the carrier earning such compensation
as under all circumS tances is Just to ii
and TO the public, would deprive such
carrier of its property without due pro-
cess of law, and deny to il the cuuil
protection of the avs. and would there
fore be repugnant to the fourteenth
amendment of the Constitution OF the
United States.
3-While rates for the transporta ion
of persons and property within the lin
It's of State are primarily for its de-
termination. tn. question whether they
are so unrea soma bly, low as to deprive
the carrier Of it's property without such
compensa ton as the Constitution Sc
cures, and, therefore. without due pro-
cess of law. cannot be so conclusively
determined ty the Legislature of the
State or by regulations adopted under
its authority, that the matter may not
become the subject Of judicial inquiry
This latest proposition Justice Harlan
said. covered the case in point. lie
then proceeded TO make an exhaustive
examination into the effect of the en-
forcamcnt Of the rates prescribed upon
the business Of the different Ncbrl ska
lines, showing the reduction to amount
To 80 per cent. for the years 1891, 1892
and 1888 The result was to show that
each OF the roads involved would for
this pcriCd have conducted their bust
ness at a loss with only one or TWO cN
cep,ions, and those only for short
while
The idea that any Legislature, State
or Federal, can cCnclusively determine
for hhc people and Pr the courts that
what Il enacts in the form of law or
what it authorizes It's agents 10 do. is
consistent with tn: fundamental law.
is IN opposition to the theory Of or in
e,tstW.i ions.
1t mad been r0ntenAed that The State
OF Nebraska could legally require local
freight business to Ire conducted cvsn at
an actual loss, if the company earned
IN It's Interstate business enough to
give 1t just compensation In respect of
it's entire line and all its business. in
tersta ate and domestic. The court did
not accept this view. Justice Harlan
saying:
In our Judgment 1t must be held that
the rcasonablcneSS or unrcas0nablcn:s SIS
OF rates prescribed by o State for the
transportation OF persons and property
wholly within It's limits must he deter
mined without reference to the business
of an interstate character done by the
carrier. or to the profits derived from
that business. The Static cannot Justify
unrcasCnaIlJly low rates for domestic
transportation, considered alona, upon
the ground that the carrier Is earning
large profits on its Interstate bus