The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1907-06-20
RATE LEGISLATION IN
4&11s }, MISSOURI.

IL
In Missouri they are having the
same trouble over railroad passenger
and freight laws that we are having
IN Minnesota. The railroads applied
to the federal courts for an Injunction
restraining the state from enforcing
the two-cent per mile passenger rate.
Judge MCPHERSON of the United States
district court for the western district
OF Missouri on Monday decided that
the two-cent rate law should 90 into
effect temporarily, but he also held
that the federal courts had sole juris-
diction and that if the rate laws en-
acted by the Missouri legislature we're
not fairly remunerative to the rail
roads the statute would be held void
by the supreme court of the United
States. In dignifed and dispas-
sionate review of the case Judge Me-
Pherson said:
That the fixing of the rates by the,
leglsI AZURE is presumably correct all
concede. That it is a legislative act
all agree. But that such rates must
be reasonably remunerative cannot
longer be discussed. The railways
are entitled to cost and reasonable
profit, and no fair-minded man dis
putes it. How to arrive at the cost
and reasonable profit is a most diff
cult problem, but it must be ascer-
tanned and this ascertainment can
only be by judicial proceedings. The
supreme court in the end must have
the evidence with the right to make
ultimate findings of fact. No local
Tribunal, federal or state, can fore
close the fact, as would be done if the
case goes to the United States supreme
court on writ of error to the state
courts,r and from the state courts there
is no method of review but by writ of
error.
'There is but one orderly and
fseemly way and that is in equity with
the right of appeal to the supreme
court, as has been said by that court
over and over again. The arguments
that the courts of the state can decide
as to the validity of the laws of the
state as we'll as can the United States
courts will not be argued by any fed
eral judge, but will be conceded.
Those courts are as high-minded and
as learned as are the federal courts,
but that is not the question. It is a
Question of jurisdiction and this court
has jurisdiction and will maintain it's
Jurisdiction. -~ss
Nor is this to the perjudice of any
one. In every instance save the
troubles of 1865 the United States
courts have, in dignifed way,
settled the disputes and law-abiding
people have acquiesced and the law
less element were compelled to sub
nit.
"That the states have the right to
manage their own local affairs will
ever be maintained. But it is too
late to talk about states debating to
the government or riding down it's
courts. This is a national affair, it's
commerce will not be interfered with
by any state, because for that almost
alone we adopted our constitution.
The commerce clause will always be
upheld and the rights of the citizens,
including corporations, will ever be
protected in their just rights under
the fourteenth amendment. These are
national questions and the supreme
court will hold the scales of Justice
with the evidence before them.
II do not know and of course do
not state that the legislature has
wronged these railroads. That is the
case on it's merits. But the railways
say they are being wronged and they
must have hearing and a hearing
on the evidence, and that evidence
carried with the record to the supreme
court. And if upon the evidence they
are being compelled to transact bust
ness at loss, no one need doubt that
the supreme court will nullify the stat
ute. If the rates fixed are remuner-
alive the statute will be upheld. It is
too late to talk about the alleged
wrongs of the supreme court declar-
ing statutes void. That was fought
out 100 years ago. Down to 1883, the
period covering the first 100 years of
the United States supreme court, that
court held 20 United States statutes
void. During the same period that
court declared as void ISL state stat
utes, of which IA were Missouri stat
utes (see appendix to vol. 131, U: S.
Rep.). How many have since been de-
Ir10 L