The Mathews journal. (Mathews C.H. [Court House]) 1903-1937, 1911-09-21
GOvcrnor AIdrick,s Address-


SPRING LAKE. N. j. Special
That the Federal courts are overstep-
ping their rights in ruling that a State
has not the power to control com
merce within its boundaries was the
declaration of Governor Chester II
Aldrich, of Nebraska, in his address
before the House of Governors. as
sembled here. Governor Aldrich is
the author OF the railroad statute of
Nebraska. He held that intrastate
regulauon ahects interstate COM
merce only incidentally and is not in
conflict with Federal laws on the sub
ject.
Quoting from many judicial decis-
ions, ne said that the weight OF au-
thOrity is in favor of the States right
TO regulate railroad rates within it's
borders, as that is one of the consti-
tutiOnal prerogatives Of State He
spoke of recent decisions by Supreme
Judge Sanborn and others that he
said were in contravention Of this con-
Sutuuonal provision for States rights
I'VE have just read in a recent de-
cision, of nationwide Importance" he
said, where our Supreme Court has
gone into the legislative business. 1t
is now becoming quite the thing for
Federal courts of inferior jurisdic-
ton to the Supreme Court of the
United States, to invade the province
and rights of these sovereign States
by subterfuge. cunning device and fall
laciOus reasoning and thus nullify
State laws and tie up generally the
them of their right TO control their
own internal commerce.
Il have heard many eminent law
yers deny the right Of the State TO. i'm
any way. control the common car
rierS of that State and grave and
learned judges have listened with pa
thence and often assent to such per-
nicious and unfounded principles of
law and with autocraJic power have
denied the right of the State TO con-
troll their internal affairs in fixing and
establishing rates for transportation of
persons and property that originated
in the State and ended in the State
for the reason that such regulation
interferes with interstate commerce,
when, as q matter OF fact the interfer-
ence complained Of was only incidental
and not a general result.
Now, IL will be conceded that the
Federal Government only has such
powers as are specifically delegated to
gated TO this central government by
the States, are, by the States, reserved
to themselves and that the citizens of
each State are subject to and must be
controlled by the laws OF that State;
that the common carriers OF the coun-
try that go over and through the sew
eral States becoming the highways OF
interstate commerce. so far as each
of the States through which they go.
are citizens of that State, are subject
TO the laws of that Safe, both in po-
lice regulation and common protec-
ton to which they are entitled. They
must submit 10 the laws of commerce
Of that State the same as any other in
diVidual citizen.
And il is a right inherent in gov
eminent to so frame and to so enforce
laws that these public service corpo-
rations shall be permitted to charge
only just and equitable rates.
The right, then, TO enact statutes
and regulate such corporations to the
end that only just and reasonable
charges may be made is inherent in
State Legislature for that commerce
which lies wholly within its borders,
and the power and duty to say what
is reasonable and just when such an
issue is rendered devolves not upon
the Legislature, but upon the courts
Of this land.
I'm other words. the idea that
courts can legislate either directly or
indirectly is repugnant 10 our entire
scheme of government. 1t belongs 10
the legislatures.
This legislative authority. under
proper constitutional or other provis-
ion. may be delegated 10 commits
sion or other subordinate body. and
that said subordinate body or COM
mission can do anything by way Of
nNlnS anu eSIdDllSulllS rates ana con-
trolling the general service OF the
common carrier the same as the Leg
islature itself.
said commission becomes a legis-
lative body. and as such cannot be
enjoined from proceeding to fix and
establish rates any more than a Leg
islature can be enjoined from enact
ing laws within the scope of its. au-
thority.
And very much of the conflict be-
tween Federal and State authorities
is, in reality, no legitimate conflict at
all, but the whole thing arises from
the dictatOrial and autocratic attitude
Of some inferior Federal courts that
are unable or unwilling to make the
distinction between an actual inter
ference and that which is only Incl
dental to State control.