The evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1907-1908, 1907-08-27
PRiTCHARD
SAYSHE HAD
JURISDICTION
Says His Court Had
Power to Issue Injunc-
tiOns in Rate Case.

ASHEVILLE, N. c., Aug. 27.-Judge
Pritchard in the United States Cir
cult Court in a long expected opinion
announced today in the rate case of
the Southern Railway against the
Corporation Commission and the At
orney-General of North Carolina, up
holds the jurisdiction of his court in
the issuance of the recent injunctions
against officials during the railroad
rate controversy and declares that the
suit is not one against the State within
the meaning of the eleventh amend
ment to the Federal constitution. That
amendment holds the judicial power
of the United States shall not ex-
tend to any suit against a. State by
citizens of another State.
The decision a Y that a State legis-
lature cannot so frame an act to de-
prIve a citizen of a right ~vouchsafed
him by the Federal constitution and it
does not possess the power 'to deprive
this court of it's jurisdiction and h
sooner those questions are definitely de-
termined the better it will be for all
parties concerned.
II dC1i9AOh hOAa5 tAa ~ " OAoll
Commissioners are still charged with max
ing rates. the only limitation upon their
power being that they shall. not make a
maximum rate in North Carolina In excess
Of 2 cents per mile. The Corporation Com
mission and the encouragement are 'spe-
clally charged with the duty of securing
the enforcement of section 4 of the pas
senger rate act, which provides heavy pen
alties and fines for a failure of railroads
- L. - 81 10 r. 81 aDua.4. .ss4A Ah,A - -
All laws In existence on the passage of
that act bearing on supervision and con-
troll of the railroads., etc, are to be con-
strued in connection with the rate act.
ut is uncomfortable" the decision says,
that a Circuit Court OF the United States
in the exercise Of its jurisdiction should
be Dowerless to afford a remedy to one
who seeks to assert a right which is guar
anteed by the constitution of the United
States. This is in no sense a suit against
the State. nor can 1t be successfully con-
tended that the State is in any wise a
party in interest. in so far as the merits
of the controversy are concerned. 1t can
not be reasonably insisted that this is a
suit to prevent the State from enforcing
any right which 1t possesses, nor can it
be said to be a suit to compel the per-
Torrance Of an obligation Of the State,
nor does it in any wise involve a matter
In Wnlcn the state mas a pecuNldry inter-
est. the parties in interest being complain
ant on the one side and the travelling
public on the other.
Therefore, the questions presented are
not such as to warrant the assumption that
this court is without jurisdiction, and a
careful study of the circumstances attend
ing the adoption of the Eleventh Amend
ment, as well as the end to be obtained by
the adoption Of the same, show conclusiyely
that those who were responsible for its
adoption never dreamed that II could be
used as a means of depriving an American
citizen of a substantial right conferred
npon him by the Constitution of the United
States.
1.-THE eleventh 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 1t
forms a part. ANY other construction OF
this amendment would practically nullify
that clause Of the constitution which pro-
vides that no State shall pass any laws
impairing the obligations of contracts as
well as the fourteenth amendment"
The opinion shows that the laws OF North
Carolina, especially provide upon what
terms an injunction shall be granted to
suspend rates, pending litigation, or in
volving the confiscatory nature of such
rates: that the statutes of North Carolina
expressly authorize the course pursued by
the courts when freight rates are involved,
but does not even require a bond for such
injunction when passenger fares are in
litigation.