Evening journal., 1905-05-06
CAN
FIX THE RATES
Attorney General Moody
Gives Importan Opinion
on This Subject
POWER OF CONTROL is DIVIDED

Washington May 6.-Attorney Gen.
eral Moody. in an opinion asked for by
Senator Stephen B. ElSin, chairman OF
the Interstate commerce committee OF
the senate, declares the government can
regulate the operations OF railroads
and fix rates. Mr. Moody's decision in
part is as follows:
"Your letter, supplemented by oral
communication, calls upon me to con-
slider the governmental power to regu-
late the operations of railroads, espe-
cially in the respect of fixing rates for
transportation, by whom that power,
so far as it exists in the national gov
ernment, may be exercised constitu-
tionally and what limits to the power,
if any, are prescribed by the constitu-
ton.
After great Consideration, it was
settled in the group of cases commonly
called the Granger cases, that there is
governmental power to regulate the
operations of railroads acting as COM
mon carriers and, as a part of such
regulation, to prescribe the maximum
rates which they may charge in the
future for the services which they shall
render to those who resort to them,
and that the power is vested in, and
may be exercised by, the legislative
branch of the government.
Under the division of the govern
mental power made by the constitution
of the United States, the authority to
regulate the charges of railroads, so
far as those charges are made for traf-
fic which is exclusively within the
states, resides in the legislatures of the
states and so far as they are made for
other traffic, resides in congress. (Con-
stitution of the United States, article 1,
section s, paragraph 81 This division
of power is fundamental has been rec
! ognized in all the cases, and is illus
trated clearly by both the majority and
( dissenting opinions in Wabash. St.
Louis and Pacific Ry. Co. VS.. Illinois
( Q1S U. s.. 55O."
Mr.. Moody then refers to numerous
decisions Of state supreme courts and
the United States supreme court, and
says:
II conclude, therefore, that any law
for the fixing of rates, according to the
standard of reasonableness, impartial
ity, and justice, or any action taken by
a subordinate administrative body, in
the execution of such a law, would not
be obnoxious to article 1, section 8,
paragraph G, Of the constitution, even
if it resulted in dissimilar rates to and
from the ports Of different states.
The views which have expressed
may be stated briefly as follows:
q. There is a governmental power to
Z fix the maximum future charges of car
/ riers by railroad vested in the legisla-
lures of the states with regard to trans
portation exclusively within the states,
and vested in congress with regard to
all other transportation.
80 Although legislative power, prop
erly speaking, can not be delegated, the
llawmaking body having enacted into
S law the standard of charges which
shall control. may intrust to an ad-
ministrative body not exercising in the
: true sense judicial power the duty to
+ fix rates in conformity with that stand
! ard
. "3. The rate-making power Is not a
a judicial function and can not be con-
{ ferred constitutionally upon the courts
of the United States. either by way OF
original or appellate jurisdiction.
"A. The courts, however, have the
q power to investigate any rates or rate.
= fixed by legislative authority and t.
e determine whether they are such as
= would be conhscatory OF the property
g Of the carrier, and if they are iudicially
found to be conhscatory in their effect
s to restrain their enforcement.
80 Any law which attempts to de-
o prive the courts of this power is un
y constitutional.
- &C. Any regulation Of land transpor
d tation, however exercised, would seen
to be so indirect in its effect upon thl
g ports that II could not constitute
preference between the ports of differ
ent states within the meaning of article
o l. section 9. paragraph s of the con
{ Btitution.
81 Reasonable. lust and imDartia