The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-06-17


| ing ticket agents or conductors. The
| supreme court in the end must have
| the evidence with the right to make
the ultimate findings of fact. No To-
cal tribunal, federal or state, can fore
close the fact as would be done if the
| case goes to the supreme court on
writ of error to the state courts and
from the state courts there is no
method of review but by writ of error.
There is but one orderly and seem
ly 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 argument that the
courts of the state can decide as to the
validity of the laws of the state as well
as can the United States courts. will
not be argued by any federal judge,
put VIII be conceded. Those courts
are as high minded and as learned as
are the federal courts, but that is not
the question. 1t is a question of jur-
lsdiction and this court has jurisdiction
and will maintain its Jurisdiction.
1t Carries Him Back.
Nor is this to be the prejudice of
any one. As 1 listened on Saturday to
the argument I was carried back to the
days of 1SO1-9. / recalled the judicial
revolutions of Virginia and Pennsyl-
vania. l recalled the case of Luther
versus Borden, growing out of the
Dorr rebellion. recalled the bitter
ness of half a century ago between
Iowa and Missouri over the state line
recalled the recent l1VoS OF 1nOIRdS
III. Benton and Governor Morris by
distinguished author. who states that
at one time or another every one of
the original thirteen states has tried
in some form or other to destroy this
government. And 1 recalled that in
every instance. save the troubles of
1S61-5, that the United States courts
have, in a dignified way, settled the
disputes and lawabiding people ac-
quiesced and the lawless element were
compelled TO submit.
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 overriding it's courts.
This is a nation. Its commerce will
not be interfered with by any state,
because for that almost alone we
adopted our constitution. The COM
merce clause will always be upheld,
and the citizens, including corpora
tions, will ever be protected in their
just rights under the fourteenth
amendment. These are national Ques-
tions and the supreme court will hold
the scales of justice with the evidence
before them. 1 do not know and of
course do not state that the state legis-
lature has wronged these railroads.
That is the case on it's merits.
Must Have a Hearing.
But the railways say they are being
wronged, and they must have a hear
ing, 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 COM
PEELED to transact business at a loss
no one need doubt that the supreme
court will nullffy the statute. If the
rates fixed are remunerative, the
statutes will be upheld. 1t is too late
to talk about the alleged wrongs of
the supreme court declaring statutes
void. That was fought out one hun
dred years ago. Down to 1888 the
- >
the supreme court, that court held 20
United States statutes void. During
the same period that court declared as
void 1S1 state statutes of which 4
were Missouri statutes. (See appendix
to volume 131 U. S. RepO
How many have since been declar- |
ed void have not taken the time to
ascertain. And some of the statutes |
thus declared void were railway |
rates statutes, enacted by the states. /
It must be remembered that in passen- |
ger and freight carrying there is much |
10 be considered besides rates or fares |
important as any, if not the most i'm |
portant is the equality of rates; the |
No rebates; no Determinations must |
De allowed. Safety of the public in
,luding passengers and employees must /
be considered. And of as much i'm
oortance as any other question is ef-
icient service Rapid and prompt de-
livery of freight must be had Fast |
passenger trains with but few stops
'or passengers going a considerable |
distance is demanded. Local trains
'or local business are required.
ITO have these reasonable compensa-
lion must be paid. So that these all are
involved. In consequence in such busi-
ness as is between St. Louis and St.
Joseph, Kansas City and ST. Joseph,
Kanss-s City and Joplin and perhaps
1ther points, which are parts of the
routes of some of the lines that are out
IF the state, grave question is pre-
sented and no small question is covered
whether parts of these statutes are void
hat the matter can be separated and
he balance of the statute remain IN
'orce, because congress, even as to those
ines wholly within the state, may or
nay not have control of such commerce
when it directly interferes with COM
nerce passing out of and back into the
state.
A Great National Question.
II neither pass upon this question nor
express an opinion thereon, because
while such questions have frequently
been discussed by the ablest of men
uch questions have not yet been decid-
ID. 1 simply mention it as a great ma
ional question. 1t is urged with much
that because penalties are
Lffixed to the statutes of 1907, that the
riminal courts of the state only take
do not stop to review the
rarious Missouri statutes upon the sub
ect of both passengers and freight, all
f which must be construed as in parti
But it Is sufficient to say that
he infiicting of penalties is not the only
emedy.
1.-The attorney general and railroad
commissioners still have much to do
nth the enforcement of these statutes.
rhich the railways contend are void
n part. In the original cases the ques-
ion is still present under the statutes
f 1907. Whether these laws by rails
lg the freight rates and lowering the
assenger fares are remunerative in
he aggregate must be considered by
ne court. The state is not in effect a