The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1911-09-16
A PROTEST OF GOVERNORS.

II is not quite easy to see how the
Governors are going to get into the
case involving the conhlcted claim of
jurisdiction in railroad eases now on
appeal TO the L. $. Supreme Court, from
the decision of Judge Sauborn of the
Eighth District. in the Minnesota rate
case. That case involved the point
that the State Railway Commission op-
posed the Interstate Commerce Com
mission on a question of rates as be-
tween two points. one III Minnesota
and the other out of that State, but
served by the railroad within the
State of Minnesota, The State Rail
way Commission undertook to make
rates favorable to the Minnesota city
and against the other city, in defiance
of the ruling of the Interstate Com
merce Commission which made them
equal, and Judge Sanborn upheld the
Federal authority. IT seems inevitable
that the L. s. Supreme Court must
do the same, in view. first of all, OF
the very closely reasoned and strongly
logical decision rendered by Judge San
born, based on the facts and the law,
and on eases already decided IN the
u. S, Supreme Court on which Judge
Sanborn largely relied in coming to
his conclusions, The conflict between
the State authority and the Federal
authority was direct. In all such con
I, tonI,p.inc Of Ia. tip,p hptI
now and for a good while past, have
been in favor of suhordinating the
State authority. 1t can hardly be
doubted that this will be the outcome
of this appeal,
But, how the Governors of the
States are going to get into the case
Is a question. The suggestion of an
address or protest to tho court VIII
doubtless be dropped. as liable 10 bring
the whole crowd into contempt. Their
right TO intervene as Governors with.
out any authority from their States in
tho matter can also fairly be doubted.
OF all the thirty five Governors as
sembled al Spring Lake but one, and
that the Governor of Wisconsin, had
any authority from his State TO repre-
sent it in any way. Al the other Gov
crnors are there simply in their ca.
pacity as Governors. without any dele.
gated authority from their States to
do anything whatever, or to commit
their States 10 any form Of action or
TO any specific move. II the Gov.
ernors, under these circumstances,
should undertake to intervene. il will
be impossible for them 10 show any
authority from their States so to do.
and we fear that the court Will treat
them rs mere interlopers. having no
legal status. and possessing no stand
ing or power from their States TO take
any action whatever. Indeed, the Gov
ernors themselves sensed this awkward
predicsment when they ran up against
the question of expense. They found
That they bad no authority from their
states 10 spend any money in getting
up any such case AS proposed, and
they finally fell back on the idea of
appointing a small committee. this
committee 10 impose on the Attorney
General Of each State which the COM
mitiee represents TO prepare the case.
But perhaps the Attorneys General. be
ing lawyers, won't do il.
The Governors arc likely to fail in
their effort to get into this case; but
their efforts TO do so direct special
and strong attention to the fact that
these Governors conventions, in their
present form, amount to nothing. and
that II they are 20 be continued TO any