The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-03-08
MAXIMUM FREIGHT CASE
The Nebraska Law Contrary to
the Fourteenth Amendment.
IN FAVOR OF THE ROADS
Justice Harlan Hands Down an Opinion
in the United States Supreme
Court-It Made an Unreason-
able Change.

W a.-JuSIlGG
Ian to-day delivered an opinion on the
Nebraska maximum freight case. He
held the Nebraska law TO be contrary
to the 18th amendment in that it au-
thorized the taking of property with
out due process of law and was there
fore invalid. Hence the railroad won.
Justice Harlan's opinion affirmed the
opinion of the circuit court of appeals
of the eighth circuit whien was against
the maximum freight rates law and
favorable to the railroads.
This case was instituted to test the
validity of the law passed by the Me-
hraska legislature in 1893 prescribing
maximum rates for transportation of
freights by railroads within the state
The decision sustains the contention of
the railroad companies. The opinion
was based largely upon the charge of
unreasonableness. Justice Brewer made
a computation showing that the reduc-
tion effected in freight rates amounted
on an average to 291a per cent, which
he held was too great change. The
case has been twice argued in the SUI
preme court. Hon. w. j. Bryan appear
ing as one of the counsel for the state
at the last hearing.
Justice Harlan said that the follow
ing principles must be regarded as set
tied:
First-A corporation is a person
within the meaning of the fourteenth
amendment. declaring that no state
shall deprive any person Of property
without due process of law, nor deny to
any person within its jurisdiction equal
protection of the laws.
Second-A state enactment. or regu-
lation made under the authority of
state enactment. establishing such rates
for transportation for persons or prop
erfy by railroads as will not admit of
the carrier earning sucn compensation
as under the circumstances Is just to
it and to the public. would deprive
such carrier of its property without due
process of law and deny to 1T the equal
protection of the laws and would there
fore be fepugnant TO the fourteenth
amendment of the constitution of the
United States.
Third-While rates for the kranspor-
tation of persons and property within
the limits of state are primarily for
its determination, the question whether
they are 50 unreasonably low as 70 de-
prlNes thes carrier -ofe Is sproperty without
such compensation as the constitution
secures and therefore without due pro-
cess of law. cannot be so determined
by the legislature of the state or by
regulations adopted under Its legisla-
ture that the matter may not become
the subject of judicial inquiry.
lEls lasI pFDp0SlItDn, Justice harlan
said. covered the case in point. He then
proceeded to make an exhaustive exami-
nation into the effect OF the enforcement
of the rates prescribed upon the busi-
ness of the different Nebraska lines.
showing the reduction 10 amount TO 2s.5
per cent. for the years 1891. 1892 and 1898.
The result was to show that each of the
roads involved would for this period
have conducted their business at loss
with only one or two exceptions and
those for only short time.
The contention that the state was the
real party in interest and that there
fore the federal court could not take
cognizance of it under the 18th amend
ment TO the constitution was oyerruled.
the court saying that the federal courts
had Jurisdiction because both of the
divers citizens or alienage of the parties
and also on account OF the fact that the
act attacked is contrary to the pro-
visions of the federal constitution. It
was also contended that the act could
not be made applicable to the Union
Pacific railroad because it has federal
charter. and the act creating the cor
poration had reserved to congress the
right TO fix the rates on this line in GER
tain contingencies. but the court took
the position that as congress had not
availed itself of the privilege. the states
through which the Union Pacific passes
have the right 70 fix rates.