The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-07-14
OUTLAW BILL HELD
 INV VIOLA TION OF
 THE CONSTITUTION.

" upon the foreign corporation the for
 ss sS. fl ~ os x. .h nos a..a in the case of any other corporation oI person bringing . like suit.
 ,. Wher6s the 6tate statutes pro- vidss that . domestic railroad corpora. beds. rights and franchisss" to for etgn corporAtf0n. and thef such prop. srty. when 70 purchas1d. shaii bs ''subjsct in all respects to. the laws oi the Sssss as # owned ny .; domsst U: into And form part of the obligation of the contract made by the purchase by the foreign corporation of such de- nestle property. The foreign corpora. tion thersaftsr has the right to hold property. subject to no other restric- tons as to length and nature of use than the existing laws provided in the case of domestic corporations, or stlch as may therssftsr. be lawfully passed the State; and % of the other rights acquired by the foreign railroad cor. poration, under the terms. of these statutes. for leasing and operating do- mestic railroads. ~,.,k. esfsy
 [. No State can lawfully enact that corporation or an individual shall forfeit . vested right of property, be- cause Of the bringing of . suit in the Federal court; since the police power of the State ends with the pfeven- tton of things which menace the well fare and happiness of its people, and the operation of the supreme law oi the land which gives the right of suit In q Federal court. capnot Invade the rights or the peace of the State. or i'm peril or hamper the happtness. rightl and welfare of the people. .
 !. So far as the Constttution of the United states b concerned, . State. un- less forbidden by tts own Constttu- tion .or estoppede by its own conduct they have acquired vested rights to da business in consequence of completed transactions under the States laws. may. without assignirg any reason therefor, exercise the arbitrary preroG- State. C. When the state has waived its right to 'exercise its arbitrary preroga- tive. by the passags of laws permit and use . particular species of prop erty here. upon terms and conditions, inconsistent with the exercise there- after. of this prerogative of the State. the Con1titution both of the State and chaser against the impairment of his right Oy any arbitrary action of the State. and 1t cannot thereafter inter- fere with any lawful use of the proper Y by foreign corporation. except by non.user. for cause defined bys the laws. Applicable alike to all similarly situ- ated. ana after . hearing in the courts.
 Under the fourteenth. aunandwent. the basis of all calculations q to the reasonabieness Of rates charGed by | railroad must be the fair v4IuS of the property used by 1t for the conveniencS .of the public; and q to ratss pfesezak- Cd for persons and property carrled ssasonsSlssss Sass msssaS sss 11I1ss Sss # S based npon aths, vsJue sfs the propsrty devoted to, sdomoati0 oummo1oSt vv1ffs cut reference to the value Of tho prop. erty dtyoted te intex-statN commerce; the one ,busfness. can De estimated ia determining tho reasonableness of the rates as to the other. s... .s 8s,
 3. While the original cost of con- struction. the amount of stock and with the original. cost of construction may be considered in determininr the probable earning capacity of the prop- erty. under the rates prescribed by the statute. and the sum required to for consideration. they are only guides Tor ascertaining the real value of the property. and that val. ,, in most cases at least, and not what the property cost, or the amount or stock or bonds, is the basis upon which the rates must be fixed. -
 9. Tn. this class of cases, the constitution forbidding rates to be un- reasonably low. a court. when 1t is aysrred that the constitution has been vhtoiated the tso. In this respect, must ascertain ness of the rates depends before 1t can finally pronounce upon the validity the enforcement of rates, and pre. liminary injunction is asked, the qlies- tion Is not what the final proof will show. but whether complainant has nection with the opposing evidence. which present such a probability that the rates may be adjudged unreason- able on the final hearing. as justifies of the statute until final proof. and whether, balancing the relative harm which can befall the adverse interests by the injunction. the court. acting for should grant or withhold the writ.
 II. One of the best modes of ar irving at the harmful or beneficial ef- tion of the operation of the statute re- ducing rates, is to take its gross and net income for recent years. preced- ing the enactment of the statute, If 1t be probable that the business will continue substantially in the same vol ume and at the same cost. and com pare the results under the prior laws, and the results which would have been effected, if the reducad rates had been applied to such business.
 IF. Where the evidence in the pre- liminary hearing leaves 1t doubtful rates will be beneficial or harmful, the court. since the burden is upon the party complaining to show their un- reasonableness, may order them tested by actual operation; but such experi- mentation with the property of any one js never Justifiable in any cases, when the facts as presented on the preliminary hearing. show only a mod crate income under the former law, and very scant earnings. or deficiency. under the reduced rates.
 IS. A suit against an individual. who Is an ofiicer of the State to pre- vent, him under color of an unconsti- tutional statute. from erecting the de- struction of property or impairment of property rights, is not a suit against the State. within the meaning of the eleventh amendment to the constitution of the United States.
 Statement of the Case,
 The Seaboard Air Line Railway. The Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company: The Kansas City, Memphis and Birm- xnohop n, PaiIrnaA ron,Na,., th1 0o.%h