The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1898-12-31
The New Railroad Law Likely
to Be Hampered
By the Necessity of the Decision
of Courts,
WHICH MUST BE HAD
Before 1t Can Be Enforced in
Kansas.
It Will Have to Go to the {. s.
Supreme Court.

Since the provisions Of the railroad
bin. as passed by the house, have been
made public. il has become the subject
of considerabI criticism in regard TO
some of the provisions It IS argued that
it attempts TO cut of appeal to the
United States supreme court, but lead
ing lawyers say that this would be an
impossibility and II is not necessary TO
state in q bill that il can be appealed
to that court in order to carry IL there
# a federal question is involved.
There is no question that 1t can be
carried to the United States supreme
court" said Judge T. +. Carver, put
II might be a long time until IL could
be passed upon, and meanwhile the or
ders of the court OF visitation would De
suspended. Time would first have 10
be given for the preparation OF an ap-
peal from the court of visitation TO the
state supreme court. Then after the
appeal has been filed it would take the
state supreme court year TO get
around to decide il, as the court Is a
year behind with its work If the state
supreme court uphOlds 1t, time must
again be given for an appeal TO the
United States supreme court, and as
that is from two TO three years DehlnQ
with its work it might be that much
longer after It was filed there before a
decision would finally be reached
1T strikes me that this law is step
backward in railroad legislation Under
the commissioner law that now exists
the board of railroad commissioners
have the power TO go into any court
having jurisdiction and compel obed-
fence TO their orders. while under the
proposed law there Will be at least be
years of delay before any real relief
viii be given to those whom II IS in
tended TO help. It doesn't strike me
that the railroads ought to be parucu-
larly dissatisfied with il.
AS to its cOnstiuutiOnaHty I can not
saw. as I have not had an opportunity
~ 1r11ir NJ rh0TOTl
ture certainly has the power TO create
courts, but whether 1t has proceeded
in the proper manner in this case 1
don't know"
Judge Horton refuses to talk about
the law at present
Wait until after it passes" he said.
land then l Will give my views about
it. Being a railroad attorney 1 do not
care TO point out any defects 1t may
have at present"
] \. Hardesty. states attorney at Los
Angeles. Gala. who has given the sub
iect OF railroad legislation cOnsiderab bic
study. and who is the author OF work
on the subject, is in Topeka watching
the proceedings Of the legislature. and
he prOnOunces the new law almost
worthless 50 far as its benefit TO the
people is concerned
The proposed court Will have no
Jurisdiction over interstate commerce"
he said to a Journal reporter, and that
is about the only kind Of commerce that
lower rates are needed on Passenger
rates do not need lowering 50 much as
freight rates do, and this court OF VlSl-
taLiOn viii only have the power to
fix rates between points in Kansas II
a shipment of grain or cattle goes a
hundred yards over the Missouri line
into Kansas City, it becomes interstate
commerce and can not be touched by
the proposed court Of visitation Ship
ments to Chicago or to the Gulf can not
be regulated The rates on farm imple-
mentS and merchandise shipped into the
state can not be lowered In fact
nearly everything in which the farmer.
the man who needs the benefit. is in
terested can not be regulated because
il is interstate commerce. The only way
those rates can be lowered is by nation
al legislation.
Another point: Suppose an action
is brought against railroad company
in the court of visitation and a stock
holder Of the road who lives in Massa-
chusetts comes into court and makes
the showing that as he is a stOckholder
he is directly interested in the suit, and
as he is a nonresident he wants the
case tried in a federal court, under the
laws the court of visitation Will be
comp PEELED to transcribe the case TO the
United states circuit court and it will
be tried there"
The hackers Of the bill claim that it
will successfully overcome all of these
difficulties when it gets into working
order 1t is claimed that when a case
preme court it will tie up that case
alone. and that the court Of visitation
can proceed with other cases just the
same No attempt has been made to
head on the right of appeal. because it
is an impOssib ility. 1t is further argued
that one of the benefits Of having a
court is that injunction proceedings
can not be brought against q judicial
body. as the right of appeal to a higher
court is open