Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1912-04-01
Governors Protest Against
Strike at State Rail Rates

Heved or burden instead OF having |
one imposed on It; and this would be
accomplished, not directly by the
states regulation Of its own commerce,
but indirectly by the action OF the rail-
roads themselves which would be only
just and right"
Testing the Minnesota decision by |
its consequences. the governors de-
clared that It was plain that the In |
evitable effect of the idea that bust |
ness necessities, peculiar location of |
lines Of transportation and OF CONNER |
cial centers can make an act Of q state |
regulating its local rates q regulation |
Of interstate rates and therefore in
state control over its own affairs.
The right of state regulation ex-
tends to every business conducted
within its borders, though such bust
ness may also extend into interstate
commerce. Any act regulating or af-
fecting an enterprise having an inter
state character necessarily affects the
with like enterprises carried on in
other states. This will apply to tele-
phones, telegraphs, natural gas and oil
companies and many other enterprises.
And the passage Of a law regulating
the hours of labor within one state
might make 1t difficult or impossible
for Its corporations or citizens to COM
I A,,I1r
in the same business in other states
where no such regulation exists. The
same condition would arise from the
passage of a workman's compensation
law, or law changing the liability of
employers in one state, when other
states have no such laws or different
ones.
IF the doctrine is to be that the
laws Of trade may make the perform
ance Of lawful duty by a state in the
regulation Of corporations doing bust
ness therein a regulation of interstate
commerce, who is to prescribe the test
or rule for applying It? Or shall we
go to the logical conclusion that the
laws of trade are higher than the con-
Z
gard to the directness or extent of
real or fancied interference with their
full operation and effect?"
In concluding the governors declared
that the rate cases involved no con-
f1ict between state and federal author
ity. but a controversy between the
states and the railroads.
I
could exercise any control over the
purely internal commerce of the
states" 1t was asserted The effect
OF the decision is not to take power
, from the states and leave II with con.
| gress, but to take power from the
r states and leave the railroads free to
charge whatever rates they please in
their traffic within the states, for ii
, the states cannot regulate these rates
nobody can.
2 THE Fourteenth amendment pro
q tects the rights of carriers from in
= vasion under the guise of regulation
by either state or nation II is not al
- ways easy to find the line which sep
arates the domain of public authority
= from that Of private right. But thii
is not so hard as it would be to trac,
;. the indirect effects of regulation by thu
: states and by congress back and fortl
!, across the boundary of their respective
: jurisdictions. The boundary itself II
= plainly marked. We who have to d,
= with administering the judicial powe
q have in especial charge the covenan
. Of the union and our plain duty is t,
. see that this boundary is respected
= leaving further responsibility to tn
= people of the country and the agencie
: they have created for the regulation
Of commerce, state and interstate"