Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1907-08-28
IS UPHELD,
Judge Pritchard Backs
Up His Injunction.
Decides Against State In Caro-
lima Rate War Fight.
State Law In Violation of Federal
Constitution, He Says.

Ashevilln. y. c.. Aug. c1--Judge
Pritchard in the United States circuit
court, in a long expected opinion. an-
nounced today in the rate case Of the
Southern Railway against the corpora
tion commission and the attorney geI-
cral Of North Carolina, -uphOlds the
jurisdiction Of his court in the issu-
ance of recent injunction against oil
ficials during the rate controversy and
declares that the suit is not one against
the state within the mcaningof thC
18th amendment to the Federal cOn>tl-
tuition That amendment holds the Ju-
drill power OF the United States Shall
not extend to any law suit against Il
state by citizens of another state. Tn"
decision says that Il state Legislature.
cannot 50 frame an act as to dcpriE"
a citizen % a right vouchs;fcd him by
the Federal constitution, and it does no:
possess the power TO dcpriV" this court
of its jurisdiction and the sooner thr:''
questions are definitely determined. tn"
bette il Will be for all persons con-
ccrned.'
The decision holds that the corpora
ton commission are still charged with
making rates, the only limitation upon
their power being that they Shall not
Inakr a maximum rate in North Caro-
lima in excess of > IA cents mi'".
The corporation commission ana tn !.
attorney general are specially charged
with the duty of securing the enforce
ment of section four of the passenger
raic act, which provides heavy penalties
and fines for Il failure of railroads and
their officials to comply with act"
All laws in existence on the passage
Of that act bearing on supervision ard
control of railroads, etc. are to be con-
strucd in connection with the rate act.
1T is inconceivable." the decision
says, that Il circuit court Of the tnitet
states in the exercise of its jurisdiction
should be pOWcrleS:1 to afford a remedy
to one who seeks to assert Il right
which is guaranteed by the constitution
OF the United States. This is in no
Sense Il suit against the state, nor Cstn
it be successfully contendcd that the
state IS in any wise a party in interest,
insofar as the merits of the COntrn-
VcrSy are concerned. 1t cannot be rca-
SOnably insisted that this is a suit 10
prevent the state from enforcing any
right which it possesses, nor can it De
said TO be a suit to compel the per
Torrance of an obligation of the state
nor does it in any wise involve mat
ter in which the state has 4 pecuniary
interest: the parties in interest being
complainant on the one side and the
travelling public on the other.
'Thcrcforr. the questions presented
are not such as to warrant the as
sumption that this court is without
jurisdiction and Il careful study Of tn"
circumstances attending tn" adoption
of the nth amendment, as well as tn"
end to hc obtained by the adoption of
the same, shows conClusively that
those who were responsible for its
adoption never dreamed that it could
be used as . means If d"prvin% an
American citizen OF II substantial right
conferred upon him by the constitution
Of tie United States. The nth amend
mcnt being Il part of the constitution.
must he construed 50 rs To give fun
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 stat" shall pass any
laws impairing the obligations Of con |
tracts as we'll as the 14th amendment.
The opinion shows that the laws off
North Carolina, especially provide upon
what terms an injunction shall be !
granted to suspend rates. pending lti- |
cation. or involving the contiscatorv |
nature Of such rates: that the statutes
Of North Carolina expressly authoriz'
the course pursued by the courts when !
freight rates are involved. but does not ,
oven require 4 bond for such injunction |
when passenger fares are in litigation. |