Atlanta Georgian. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1912-1939, 1912-08-20
MILEAGE BILL IS
CALLED FAULTY
AND VETOED
Governor, in Killing Measure,
Declares 1t Is Contrary to
Federal Constitution.

Governor Brown today vetoed. the
bill requiring the pulling of mileage or
trains, a measure for which the travel
ing men of the state have been fight
ing for many years. At present the
mileage must be exchanged at station
windows.
A petition of Georgia travelling men
asking that the train rule be ordered, Is
pending before the state railroad COM
mission The governors veto will force
the commission to make a ruling or
the question. Indications are that this
ruling will be unfavorable to the trav-
cling men.
The governor brands the act a:
against the constitution of the United
States. in that it makes the state lncui
contract.
He points out that mileage is purely {
voluntary contract between the railroad
and its patrons fixing rate lower thar
the maximum allowed by the state rail
road commission. For the state to at
tempt to say in what manner this vol
untary contract shall be carried ou
would be to assume an unconstitutional
obligation. he declares.
Reasons For Veto.
The governor says:
In section 1 this bill says that it
shall not be necessary to exchange
the mileage ticket or coupons there
from for a ticket, any contract to
the contrary Notwithstanding"
Section X of the Constitution of
the United States says: NO state
shall pass any law impairing the
obligation Of contracts"
Section / of this bill, therefore,
is in violation of the organic law Of
the land and is thus inevitably in
valid.
Again. the very designation by
which the law describes the rail-
road companies, viz: common car
riers," necessarily carries the re-
quirement that they shall protect
equal rights for and accord equal
privileges to all, whereas this bill
provides that he who gets the re-
duced rates shall have an advan-
tage in convenience over all pas
sengers paying the maximum rates.
In the case of the Lake Shore
and Michigan Southern Railway Co.
VS.. Smith, the supreme court of the
United States has said:
Cites Supreme Court.
The legislature having establish
ed a maximum rate, a general law
now assumes to interfere with the
management of the railroad while
conducting its affairs pursuant to
and obeying the statute regulating
rates and charges. and notwith-
standing such rates it assumes to
provide for a discrimination, an ex-
ception in favor of those who may
desire and are able to purchase tick
cts at what might be called whole
sale rates--a discrimination which
operates in favor of the wholesale
buyer, leaving the others subject to
the general rules"
The ruling made by the court as
to one species of discrimination
would, of course, be applied TO all
other varieties of the same
Upon the subject of mileage tick
ct regulations, in the case of Esch-
ner VS.. Pennsylvania Railroad Com
pany QS l. c. c. R. 60) the Inter
state Commerce Commission
Held. That the right to use ex
change orders and mileage books is
in the nature of a privilege volun-
tarily accorded by the carriers IN
der their tariffs. and must be ac-
cepted by those VINO use such spe-
ciaI fares with all lawful and nom
discriminatory limitations that may
be attached to them"
Finds Another Flaw.
The decisions of the supreme
courts of several states are in line
with the above authorities.
Again in section 1 this bill says:
The railroad COMM ssion is en-
powered and directed to take such
steps and to make such further
regulations (under penalty) as 1t
may deem necessary to enforce this
act"
The foregoing is unlawful in that
it delegates to the railroad commits
sion the right to prescribe penal
ties, whereas that right is one
which the legislature must exercise
but can not delegate 1t alone
makes laws and prescribes penal
ties: it's creatures enforce the laws
by applying the penalties
| will add that l can not escape
the knowledge that in taking this
official position l am forced to be
the instrument in seriously disap-
pointing an energetic, useful and
worthy element of our citizenry;
but we must each recognize that we
can not always have what we want,
but must take What the law allows
US to have. and that there come
times when disappointments are the
discipline of the law, and that in
the struggle of life each class or
each man is a winner when that
c1aes or that man secures eoualitV