The Chanute times. [volume] (Chanute, Kan.) 1897-1913, 1907-09-06
SAYS He WASRIChT
Nudge Pritchard Hands Down a
Decision in North Carolina
Rate Case.
HE UpHOLDS HIS OWN ACT
Right Conferred BY Constitution Can
Not Be Taken Away BY Act of
Legisature-State Not
Party.

Asheville, N c., Aug. 2S.-Judge
Pritchard in the United States cir
cult court, in long expected opinion
announced Tuesday in the rate case
of the Southern railway against the
cooperation commission and tie at
torney general of North Carolina, up
holds the jurisdiction of his court
in the issuance of the recent injunc-
tions against officials during the rail-
road rate controversy and declares
that the suit is not one against the
state within the meaning of the 1lth
amendment to the federal constitu-
ton That amendment holds the jul
dicial power of the United States
shall not extend to any suit against
a state by citizens of another state.
The decision. says that state legis-
lature cannot so frame an act as to
deprive a citizen of a right vouch-
safed him by the federal constitution,
1t does not possess the power Ito
deprive this court of its jurisdiction
and the sooner these questions are
determined the better It will be for
all parties concerned.
The decision holds that the corpor-
alton commissioners are still charged
with making rates the only limitation
upon their power being that they
shall not make maximum rate in
North Carolina in excess Ut IA cents
per mile. The corporation commits
sion and the attorney general are
specially charged with the duty of
securing the enforcement of section
of the passenger rate act, which
provides heavy penalties and fines for
a failure of railroads and their Off
cials to comply with that act"
All laws in existence OH the pas
sage of the act bearing on supervi-
sion and control of railroads, etc, are
to be construed in connection with
the rate act
ut is inconceivable," the decision
says, that a circuit court of the
United States in the exercise of its
jurisdiction should be powerless to
afford a remedy to one who seeks to
assert right which is guaranteed by
the constitution of the United States.
This is in no sense a suit against the
state nor can it be successfully con-
tended that the state is in any wise
a party in interest insofar as the
merits of the controversy are con-
-cerned. 1t cannot be reasonably in
sisted that this is a suit to prevent
: the state from enforcing any right
which it possesses, nor can it be said
~ III IN onDnnn1 tho nprfOrm-
ance of an obligation of the state, nor
does it in any wise involve matter
in which the state has pecuniary
interest; the parties in interest being
complainant on the one side and the
travelling public on the other.
Therefore the questions presented
are not such as to warrant the as
sumption that this court is without
jurisdiction and a careful study of
the circumstances attending the adop-
ton of the 18th amendment as we'll
as the end to be obtaiued by the
adoption of the same, show conclu-
siveTy that those who were RESPONSE
BILE for its adoption never dreamed
that it could be used as means of
deprlVlnS an American ClJlLSH VI
partial right conferred upon him by
the constitution of the United States.
The 18th amendment being a part of
the constitution, must be construed
so as to give full force and effect to
every provision of the instrument of
which it forms part. Any other
construction of this amendment
would practically nullify that clause
of the constitution which provides
that no state shall pass any laws
impairing the obligations OF contracts
as well as the 14th amendment"
The opinion shows that the laws
of North Carolina, especially provide
upon what terms an Injunction shall
be granted to suspened rates, pending
litigation or involving the confisca-
tory nature of such rates; that the
statutes of North Carolina expressly
authorize the course pursued by the
courts when freight rates are in
volved, but does not even require a
\ bond for such injunction when pas
. senger fares are in litigation.