The San Juan islander. [volume] (Friday Harbor, Wash.) 1898-1914, 1908-03-28
Cannot FIX RATES
-,AI SUPREME COURT PRAc.
o.,IY HOLDS STATES ARE
WITHOUT POWER.
,ous Penalties Provided Held to
,.,der Statutes InvaIid-Decision
Delivered by Justice Peckham and
,ee,ted To by All Other Justices
rx.e,t HarIan-Minnesota Case De-
cided.

,.-t,ino+nn March 24.-The SUI
court of the United States has
,.,.ad to grant a writ of habeas cor
- Attorney General Young, of
,,:.rasota. releasing him from the
,oraItv imposed by the district court
that state for contempt. Mr..
1.,,,,o,e sentence was the result of pro-
a5inos instituted in the state court
~ minnesota for enforcement of the
.lroad rate law after the federal
nanrt had prohibited such a course.
No. runreme court also affirmed the
5ocision of Judge Pritchard, of the
Tr,;1od States circuit court for the
.,ostnrn district of North Carolina, dis
abaroing from Imprisonment James H.
Wood a ticket agent of the Southern
.o;,1yav at Ashevilla. Wood was SEN
mood nv the Asheville police court to
.,rvo term on the rock pile for col
1ocring for a ticket on the Southern
aoa5 greater sum than was permit
ted bv the state railroad law.
IN both cases the right of the states
- fly rates for railroad transportation
u,as the issue, and both involved con-
4icts between the federal and the state
courts.
Opposed to States.
The decision in each case was OPP
nosed both to the states and to their
courts, The opinion of the court in
both cases was announced by Justice
peckham and with the exception of
Justice Harlan, all the other members
of the court assented.
Iustice Harlan read dissenting
opiDion in the Young case, in which
he took the view that the suit was
practically a proceeding against the
state. therefore permissible under the
eleventh amendment to the constitu-
lion. He characterized the opinion as
era making in the history of the court,
said it had the effect of closing the
courts of a state against the state
itself. and predicted that the result
would be disastrous.
The two cases were so similar that
both practically were decided in one
opinion. The announcement was made
in the Minnesota case.
Justice Peckham's opinion was out
lined as follows:
BY reason of the enormous penal
ties provided in the rate laws by way
of fines against the companies and i'm
prisonment of their agents and en-
poyes, the companies are in effect
prevented from ever questioning the
validity Of those laws, as the risk of
confscation of property and imprison-
ment of agents in case the companies
failed in their defense was too much
to undertake in order to obtain jul
dicial decision of the question of such
validity
Deprived of Protection.
Such laws are, therefore, held un-
constitutional, as they prevented the
companies from resorting to the courts
and therefore deprived them of equal
protection of laws.
The question of sufficiency of the
rates to enable the company to obtain
some return to it's stockholders for
their investments has for many years
decide, as it would be a violation of
the constitution of the United States
10 TX rates so low as to be cOnfisca-
tory if enforced.
The laws providing rates for trans
portatlon of passengers and freight in
me two cases under consideration have
Oeen held by the courts below to be SO
low as to be substantially confiscatOry.
and should therefore not be enforced
untll after further trials. The courts
mad Jurisdiction to make such an or
der
II mas also for many years been held
ulat suit is not one against the state,
aiIhough it prevents a state officer
from bringing suits for the enforce
Aent Of state enactment which fixed
rates SO low as to be confiscatory, and
"nlch act was, therefore, a violation
Vi the constitution of the United States
"Nu This principle is reiterated and
'saln decided in these cases.
Inc Jurisdiction of the federal courts
IL such cases is only exercised where
uie state enactment is alleged to be a
Iolatlon of the constitution of the
united States, and in such cases it is
upper for those courts to take juris-
ulcuon equally with the state courts,
a. the constitution of the United
states is by it's own provisions the SUI
piehe law of the land, anything in
s'ate legislation or law to the con-
NaEy Notwithstanding and there is no
asuFpatlon of jurisdiction in such
event.
Authority to Decide.
mnen a federal court has taken jur-
suction of cases before any proceed
Us III a state court has been com
nenced the former court has authority
" ueclde the case and to enjoin any
peiSon from proceeding in a state
oouEt until the federal court has pro-
'eeoed to judgment.
Florida Senator Dies.
washington n n March % Tint