The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1899-07-06

places. The second, is the power to
regulate the manner of maintaining and
operating the railroads, with view to
insuring the security, convenience and
accommodation of the general public,
without regard to the question Of rates;
in other words-the rate-making power
and the administrative power respec-
lively. This distinction must be borne
in mind in order to understand the diff
ferent provisions of the statute and the
decisions of our Supreme Court pursu.
ant to them. a. 49, g.
In proceedings under the first class of
questions, viz: Those that involve the
rate making power and the prevention
of determinations, the railroad com.
pany has the right of appeal to the Dis
the Commissioners See Subdivision D
of Section Is of the Act. page 81 of
the pamphlet which send you here
with). In the other class of cases,
which relate only to administrative reg
ulations, there is no appeal from the
action of the Commissioners to the Dis
trict Court. The propriety # their de-
termination can only be in3 uired into
upon suit instituted for the enforce
ment of the Commissioners decision.
See the case cited, al Mimi, page 1885,
The "Steenerson case," which is the
most important case that we have had
in our courts under the law up to the
present time, was decided upon re.
view of the action taken by the District
Court upon the trial Of an appeal taken
from the Commissioners decision pre-
scribing lower rates. See the statement
Of the case by Judge CAVITY on page ia,
Vol. ~, Northwestern Reporter. He
says: after summoning the railway
company and having a hearing, as pro-
vided by the statute, the Commission
made an order reducing rates on grain
on all the lines of the railway company
within the state. From this order the
railway company appealed to the Dis
trict Court and after a hearing on the
appeal, the Court reversed the order
of the Commission. From the order
of the Court the Attorney General ap-
peals to this Court, etc." This appeal
was taken under Subdivision D, Section
Is, just cited. A trial in the District
Court upon an appeal of that character
is undoubtedly the most important fea-
ture in proceeding under the law, for
upon the record as there made the case
will be reviewed by the Supreme Court
and eventually in the Supreme Court of
the United States, If writ of error is
taken to the latter Court This trial in
the District Court upon an appeal is
now virtually trial de novo, as I sug-
gested in my message, and it was this
section that I recommended should be
amended so that it would not be neces-
sary to go over again in the District
Court the same ground that had been
travelled before the Commissioners, for
retrial upon new evidence necessarily
consumes more time
Senate File No. "a did not assume to
correct this defect, as you appear to
think, but steps in to amend Section %,
page 26 of the pamphlet, which simply
relates to the enforcement of the orders
or decisions of the Commission These
orders or decisions are of two kinds: Ad-
ministrative orders and final orders or
decisions involving the rate making
power, when such orders have not been
appealed from to the District Court In
regard to the latter class of orders,
where the railroad company had the
right of appeal if they, saw fit, it is a
we'll settled principle of law that where
an individual or corporation has liti-
gated question before tribunal upon
the merits and had the right of appeal
from the order or decision of such tri-
bunal to the District Court and omitted
to exercise it, it cannot subsequently
raise any question as to the merits of
the order or decision when it is sought
to secure enforcement of such
order or decision in the courts. It
stands upon the same footing, when not
appealed from, as a judgment of the
District Court rendered upon an appeal
under the provisions of Subdivision
of Section Is. Therefore, when such ar
order comes up for enforcement in the
District Court, no question can bt
raised as to its validity OF its reason
ableness, provided the company hac
due notice. Hence the only class Of or
ders or decisions that can be Irrigated
under the provisions of Section %
which you sought to amend by Senat,
File "a, as the law now stands are thos,
relating to administrative proceedings
You will observe by Subdivision B o
Section Is that on the hearing of tn
appeal provided for IN that section 9Th
record of said Commission shall b
prima facie evidence of the matter
therein stated" The same provisio,
exists in Section 90 in regard to pro
ceedings for the enforcement of the OF
ders or decisions of the Commission
under that section. 1t is provide
Commencing on Page 28), upon
trial of such case, the findings of fact O
said Commission, as set forth in its rec
ord, shall be prima facie evidence Of tn
matters therein stated" I have under
scored these provisions in the pamphle
which send you. These two provision
are the most important features regr
7 lating the practice under the railroa
! act. They have the effect of THROWN
t the burden of proof upon the railroa
company to show that the decision {
l the Commission is wrong in case of a
D anDoal under Section IL and 1ikow;e