The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-02-16
GEORGIA RAILROAD COMMISSION
Supreme Court of That State in Elaborate
 Opinion.

-ec'et" Anat tne Nc&tssete-S
 Confer Rate Making Power On
 the Communication. That De-
 cision Upheld By United
 states supreme Court.
 In the case of Georgia Railroad ct as. vs. smith. ct al. Railroad Commis- sioners ct al published in the Georgia reports, page ss4, the head notes are thus given:
 The object of the Constitutional pro vision conferring power upon the leg | lslature to regulate railroad IPeignts and passenger tariffs, to prevent unjust and just freights and tariffs, and maj l ing 1t the. duty sof the legislature 10 pass laws in furtherance of this pro~ l vision, was to give proper protection i to the citiizens against unjust rates | for the transportation of freights and passengers oyer the railroads of the nation. even though the rates might be just 1t was not expected that the | legislature should do more than pass Nor were they required to enter into ! the details of settling freights and tariffs over all the railroads in the State. The railroad commissioners are officers appointed to carry into execu- ton the laws passed by the legislature. and are constitutional officers.
 "(a) The powers of the railroad commissioners are not Legislative. The ] power to adopt rules and regulations l 10 carry into effect law already pass ed, differ from power to enact the law"
 The opinion of the Supreme Court of Georgia in this case was delivered by Mfr. Justice Crawford. and is as fol- lows:
 "The Georgia Railroad and Banking Company. denying the. power of the
 railroad commission of the State ot Georgia to regulate the freight and
 ed this bill that the right of said Com | mission to exercise the power may be iudicialIy determined. This power is
 Il. Because, by Article 1. Section 9
 par. 1. of the Constitution of Georgia, the duty Is imposed on. the General As- sembly to regulate freight and pas
 E. Because the act. of October 14. 1879. Is unconstitutional and void as being an attempt to delegate legisia- sion and because if is in conflict with the Constitution of Georgia which for
 bids the imposing of excessive fines or i inflicting unusual punishments.
 The prayer of the bill Is: CD That the Act of October i4, 1879, be declared null and void. (2) That 1t be deciai . Railroad and Banking Company. C3J | That the said Commission be perpetual | ly cnJolned from prescribing rates of 1 fare and freight over the Georgia Rail ner enforcing against it the proyis- ions of the said Act of October 14, 1879, ] (4 For general relief
 l The Chancellor below. after consid- ering the bill and exhibits of com plaiRant and cross-hs and exhibits of defendant, refused the injunction pray ed for and that refusal Is assigned as
 'The questions to be determined by this litigation are:
 "G) Whether the act establishing the Railroad Commission of the State of | Georgia, with it's powers and duties, is not unconstitutional and void, because | 1t is the duty of the Legislature, under i the Constitution, to regulate freight and passenger tariffs, and this act seeks | to delegate this power to the said com mission.
 l upon the Legislature the power and authority of regulating railroad freight l and passenger tariffs, preventing tn ] just dtscriminations. and requiring req; req | passenger tariffs. It further makes it l the duty of the Legislature to pass laws from time to time to carry into effect this Constitutional provision, at,i to enforce the same by adequate penal | ties.
 For this purpose. and to this end, was, the act under conside 3tion passTbo, ,,b stantially that. if any railroad doinS business in this State. shall charge col | lect, demand. or receive; more than l fair and reasonable toll or compensa- tion for tho transportation of passen l gers or freight of any description, or | for the use and transportation Of any TSn Se 'sr Seemsa Spen uty of s | and upon conviction, dealt with as oy the said act provided. l In order that fair and reasonable 1 tolls or compensation for the transpor- ! tation of passengers and freight might | be certainly had, 1t was also provided | that there should be three Railroad l 1t should be to make reasonable and | just rates of freight and passenger l business in the State on the railroads thereof, and that schedule Of such rates should be made for each railroad doing business in the State, which salo | schedule should be deemed and taken ] in all the courts of the State as sum cient evidence. that the rates were Just | and reasonable charges for the trans l portation of passengers and freignts | and ears upon the railroads, in all cases | just discriminations or improper | charges Adequate penalties were | likewise provided for the enforcernen! of the rules and regulations of the said l | sonable and. just rates to be observed | by the railroad companies.
 Thus 1t appears that the Constitu- | ton provided that the Legislature | should have power to regulate the | railroad freights and passenger tariffs | and to require reasonable and Jus' rates for both; that it made it also the | duty of the Legislature to pass laws ! necessary for its execution; and that | in pursuance of that duty, the law com
 plained of was passed.
 The object of the Constitution pro,
 visions and the legislative enactment
 was to give proper protection to the l citizens against unjust rates for the | transportation of freights and passen- | gers over the railroads of the State l and t9, prevent unjust discriminations l even though the rates might be just | It was not expected that the LeigslaturC
 should do more than pass laws to ae'
 complish the ends in view. When this
 was done, it's duty had been discharged
 All laws are carried into execution by l purpose; some with more, others with l less, but all must be clothed with power | sufficient for the effectual execution oi
 the law to be enforced. | Legislative grants of power to tbt
 officers of the law to make rules and | and effect of laws, are by no means un' | common in the history of our legfsla' | tion 1 need only mention the power
 given to the judges of the Supreme
 and Superior Courts. of this State tt
 establish rules which, If pot in con
 fiict with the Constitution of thu
 United States, or this State, or thu | laws thereof, are binding and must b.
 obeyed. And 1t has never been claimed that they were unconstitutional becaus' lature and read three times and or | three seDarate days in each house O.