Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1911-09-17

responsibility on any one man or set
Of men.
Therefore, I say that when any court,
whether IL be the United States supreme
court or a court OF inferior jurisdiction,
continually makes effort by a judicial
decision to do that which the people and
the people alone have a right 20 do, then
say that such court is seeking TO
establish judicial tyranny. And II allowed
to proceed unohsllenged along the line Of
this unwarranted assumption of power,
representative government will simply BIO
that in name only.
I'm this connection, l invite your at
tentlon to an examination of an elaborate
opinion recently written by Judge San
born heretofore referred to in the Min
nesota freight and passenger rate cases.
IAN examination of this opinion discloses
the fact that it is based upon the general
propositions: First, that the rate law re-
ducing rates on freight traffic is reduc-
ton of from 20 to 25 per cent and that the
rate so provided in commemorative, as Is
also the 2-cent fare law He finds that the
Minnesota maximum rate law would net
annually to the Northern Pacific Railway
company 2s per cent, to the Great Northern
1855 per cent, and TO the Chicago, st, Paul,
1T is interesting to note again, in eonnee-
ton with the discussion of Judge sanborn's
judicial opinion, that this sweeping and all
important decision is based on a valuation
Of the railroads, fixed by three real estate
agents and the employees of railroads. and
apparently dsregards the physical valua-
ton Of the roads placed by the state The
state Of Minnesota, at enormous expense
and with much pains in detail had care
fully appraised the railway properties of
the state by having them gone over by
men of the greatest competency and eff
flciency; men who were impartial and
skilled experts along this line of work. Yet
their testimony was apparently dscredited
and thrown to the winds, and the weak,
prejudioed, incompetent statements of these
three real estate agents and railway en-
ployes is given all force and consideration,
THE second proposition is that, admitting
the rate law would met the railroads re-
munerative rates, he holds that the same
are void by reason OF the fact that they
directly regulate and substantially burdea
interstate commerce, In coming to this
conclusion the learned Judge bases all OF his
reasoning and argument upon the effect
that these rates have upon certain towns in
the border line between Minnesota and
North Dakota.
THE position that the court takes in this
regard has never been passed upon by the
United States supreme court. 1t Is true
that the supreme court has handed down
many decisions and applied the rule that
state laws must not regulate interstate
traffic, but it has never decided whether OF
not a substantial reduction in freight and
passenger rates that affected certain cities
only across the border of a state that was
reducing its freight and passenger rates
was such an interference of interstate com
merce as TO nullify the law. In all pre-
vious cases which the United States SUI
preme court has passed upon 1t has always
taken into consideration the general volume
of traffic and as to how this was affected
over an entire state by the regulation In
another state.
Another important matter in this Min
nesota case, worthy OF note, Is that Judge
Sanborn, in determining that this statute
was void because 1t was a regulation Of
interstate traffic, is that he did not con-
slider how and in what way this Mime
sofa rate affected the volume of traffic