The Advocate and news., 1898-12-28
Governor Leedy's rIessage.

cial session of the Legislature was reat
at 5 o'clock Wednesday afternoon. 1t II
in full as follows:
To the Senate and House OF Represen
tatives:
Although the present executive and q
majority Of each house Of the present
legislature were elected under a pledge
70 the people to enact maximum rate
law, when the time arrived for the full
filling Of that pledge the menace Of
judicial decision, by the highest tribu-
nal in the land, which would make legis-
lative regulation of railroad charges
practically impossible, caused many to
doubt the wisdom OF attempting the
promised legislation; and such difer-
ence Of opinion prevailed that the exec
utlve felt called upon to withhold his
approval from the compromise measure
finally passed.
There was then pending undetermined
In the Supreme court Of the United
States case which involved the ques-
tinn whether, as to railroad legislation,
the legislatures Of theoretically soVer-
eIgn States should be reduced to the level
OF city councils or school district boards
upon the reasOnablness, as well as the
authority, of whose acts courts may sit
in Judgment. The decision Of that case
announced soon after the adjournment
Of the legislature, fully justified the fears
and antlcipations Of those who deemed
it futile to pass maximum rate bill;
for Il rendered such an enactment
mere proposal Of legislation, not law.
which must be submitted to the Federal
court for approval or rejection. That
decision declared that whether the rates
of transportation prescribed by a legis-
lature are reasonable is judicial ques-
tiOn, and that first single Federal
Judge, and finally, five Federal justices
may, upon that question, reverse and
hold null the deliberate judgment OF the
entire legislature, with its numerous
membership, acting under the same oath
as the Judges and calmly celebrating for
days in separate chambers; that the
courts may sit In judgment, not merely
upon the constitutional power OF the leg
islature to leglslate concerning the par
ticular subject matter, but upon the rea-
sonableness of its acts--the power to
act being conceded.
Maximum Rate Law Impossible.
AT the same time the court declined
though urged, to lay down any definite
rule by which, in advance Of It's judg-
ment in each particular case, legisla-
ture might be able to say whether sug-
gested rates would be held reasonable or
not; so that whether rates are reason
able can be determined only by stan"
dard which must remain unknown 20
every human being but the justices Of
that court, save as they may vOUchsafe
to reveal II anew as each successive law
comes before them to be destroyed. II
follows that you can only suggest min
lInum rates; you cannot prescribe them.
You can submit for approval a maximum
rate proposition; you cannot enact q
maximum rate law.
However, while the people Of Kansas
have for years been demanding a max
lmum rate law, the real essence Of their
demand has been the regulation Of rail
road charges; and although we have
been deprived Of our power to redeem
our pledge according to its very letter,
st is still our duty to do what we can to
redeem 1t according to It's spirit; and
that this may be done, have exercised
Che power given me by the constitution
to convene you In special session.
II the reasonableness be judicial, not
:, a legislative, question, may not courts
determine II upon the application Of the
people as we'll as upon the application
OF railroad companies? II railroad
company may challenge in court Of
equity an entire schedule Of rates pre-
acribed by the legislature, may not the
State challenge in court Of equity an
entire schedule Of rates prescribed by
railroad company? And II, as held in
the decision of the Nebraska case, on
the decision Of motion to modify the
DEGREES, the court may, In case brought
by the railroads, so mold its decree as