The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-02-06
OTHER PEOPLES MOTIONS
FEDERAL CONTROL INEVITABLE

nv Philadelphia Press. III
E 1t is, as the attorney general OF Minnesota
has Weightily said in his speech, deliberate
evasion of the law of Minnesota through the
creation of New Jersey corporation, which,
by acquiring the stock of two parallel roads
In minnesota, practically cOnsolidates them
The state of Minnesota finds itself, therefore,
In a position where 1t is unable, with regard
TO railroads passing over it's territory and af-
fecting the interests OF all It's citizens, to
prevent deliberate violation of the law by a
corporation organized in New Jersey, but
completely out of its jurisdiction. 1t, there
fore, makes it's appearance In the supreme
court as a sovereign state to secure from the
federal government the redress which a SOW
ereign state similarly attacked and not a
party to federal union would assert either
by drastic legislation or by force of arms.
Attorney General Douglas was wise enough
to make this SINGLE sharp and definite asser-
ton the center Of his case The strength of
his position is sufficiently shown by the coun-
| ter argument of w. D.. Guthrie and his asso-
ciates, including ex-Attorney General Griggs,
that Minnesota had no way, and, in the ma
ture of things, could have no way of meet
ing this summary notification of it's statute
and public policy by a New Jersey corpora
ton, because nc law and no constitutional
principle existed under which state could
expect to control the action Of either persons
| or corporations outside of its own boundaries.
The state could not, the federal government
| was not authorized to act the supreme court
! had no Jurisdiction, whether a wrong ex-
, listed or not; no remedy was presented by
! the constitutional system under which the
| people of the United States live
Whether this is good law or not, 1t is enn
| doubtedly believed to be good law by the
isstrongest body of counsel which could be
gathered by the largest aggregation Of rail
| road capital now known. 1t undoubtedly
| ri 1870 To q Shprn nd 1ofn ITO thn m
plete collapse OF the power of the state tc
enforce any definite public policy with refer
| ence to any railroad consolidation or direc-
! ton. Whether it is we'll that the two rail
roads concerned should merge and end com.
petition or not is economic issue; but
there is probably no American citizen who
| does not believe that the people, acting eithel
through state or federal government should
have the power to act in the matter and regu
! late these stupendous changes in the regula
ton OF capital and of railroads.
! No such power exists according to the con
| tentton of the counsel for the Northern Secu
rites company. II it is possible for a New
Jersey corporation to own two railroads, i
i would be possible for a New Jersey corpora
ton to own all the railroads in the country
II it is possible to nullify by such cours
I these statutory limitations of a state on tn
1 capital and consolidation of lines within thes
limits, it is possible, by such a course, t.
| nullify these statutes in ALI the states
i The argument of Mr. Guthrie and his asso
ciates, therefore, leads directly and logical.
to the conclusion that the railroad problem
i is already altogether outside of any stat
control. States may still, through their com
! missions, regulate lesser matters, such as
place where station has to be established
special accommodations for the public an
other lesser details; but the weightier ques
lions of capital, consolidation and rates hav
wholly passed out of their control. Nothin
is left but federal control and regulation
this once becomes clear, such control an
| regulation will be near-nearer than mos
believe-and the little finger Of federal con
troll will be thicker than the loins of stat
regulation. Rates will be decreed and capita
dealt with by federal power after a drasti
fashion unknown to state powers.