Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1907-09-11
pennsylvania
RATE LAW
IS VOID
RAILROAD SCORES IN
STRUGGLE WITH STATE
TwoCentSa a Mile Not Sufficient
to Provide Profit in Passen-
ger transportation Court
Decides,

Philadelphia, Pa, Sent. lO.--Juages
Wilson and Audenreid. of the cont
OF common pleas, this morning de-
clared unconstitutional the two-eent
fare law passed by the last legisla-
ture. The case upon which the deci-
sion was made will be at once taken
To the state supreme court
The two-cent law was enacted by
the last legislature as the result OF
agitation during the last political cam
paign, all parties pledging themselves
In favor of such legislation
The railroads led by the Pennsyl-
wanna, and the Reading made
strong fight against the enactment, but
both branches OF the legislature pass
ed the bill with a practically unani-
nous vote. The act was 20 90 into
OBJECT on October l.. The Pennsylvanla
was first to attack its validity bring
ng suit I'm the local courts to restrain
the county of Philadelphia from col
lecting fines for the violation Of It's
provisions. That hearing lasted near.
w week, and among the witnesses
Were President McCrea and several of
the vice presidents OF the Pennsyl-
vania railroad. The contention of the
company was that the law was not
constitutional, as no inquiry had been
made on the part Of the legislature as
10 whether the railroads could make
70 fair profit under the law. which the
Pennsylvania company asserts Il can
not do.
All the other railroads operating in
Pennsylvania have also brought simi-
lar proceedings In the various coun-
ties of the state. but no decisions
have been rendered, as Il Is UNDER
stood that the Pennsylvania suit VIII
be made a test case Ia the higher
courts.
The decision Of the court covers 10
typewriter pages. After declaring
that the Pennsylvania Railroad COM
pany Is not vested with any immunity
from the exercise Of the power OF the
legislature to regulate rates, the court
takes up the contention Of the COM
pany that the two-cent rate Is un
reasonable, sustains the contention
and grants the injunction asked for.
The court holds that the act Is not
To be denied enforcement on the
ground that Il extends TO interstate
commerce and thus infringes ON the
province of the federal laws. ''rhe
act - says the court "is to be regard
ed as intended 10 apply only 20 that
part OF the passenger business of the
railroads over which the legislative
power of the state regulation ex-
tends"
The conclusions are as follows; "Wc
find that although with respect To
matters Of form. no valid objection TO
law exists, its operations, as u re-
latcs 10 the Pennsylvania Railroad
is Objectionable on constltu-
tional grounds for the following rea-
sons. First. as the regulation of
rates of fares on lines constructed by
plaintiffs under the act of April l3.
1876. between Harrisburg and Pitts
burg, and Pittsburg and Erie. the act
violates the existing contract between
the plaintiff and the commonwealth
and so contravens article 1, section
10. Of the constitution of the United
States.
second-As a regulation of the plain
tin's Interstate passenger business In
Its entirety, the act. under existing
Is unreasonable and
and by deprlving the
plaintiff OF its property without due
process of law. the act violates amend
ments of the constitution of the
United States.
"Third-Slnce taking from the plain
I'M of the profitable use OF It's prop
srty invested in interstate passenger
business may be regarded as the taxi
Ing quo ad hoe OF that property for
public purposes and since just COM
Densation Is not made. therefore the
set violates article 1. section 10, or
lie constitution Of Pennsylvania.
"Fourth-Viewed as an alteration
,r revision Of the plaintiffs franchise
% establish and enforce over It's lines
iuch rates as (within the maximum
ixed by act OF April 13. is46l its
PRESIDENT and directors may deem
reasonable. The act violates article 10
4 the constitution Of Pennsylvania.
because Il establishes 80 low maxi
mum fare as to render the plainiins
business unremunerative.
ut provides no compensation for tho
lss thereby occasloned."
we accordingly urge thai tl1 aet
innot be- enforced 20 far as II con-
erns the Pennsylvania Railroad COM
any. aud that the county Of Phila-
elphla should be restricted from de-
handing fines N the maximum which
lis act attempts 90 establish be dis
sgardod by plaintiffs"
Today- decision applies only 10 the
lunty Of Philadelphia. In order TO
ave a decision that viii cover tho
ate. Il Is the intention of the Penn
.iyanla company 10 ask the supreme
,urt 10 take action on tOday's deel-
on before October 1. when the law
ordered 10 take effect