The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1913-06-11
DECISION FAv0RS
ROADS, SAYS TAFT
Ex-PREsIDENT GIVES OUT SIGNED
STATEMENT ON MINNESOTA
RAT CASE.
HELPS u. S.
RECOURSE FOR RAILROADS Is To
PETITION CONGRESS TO ENACT
PROPER LEGISLATION COVER
ING COMPLAINTS.

NEW YORK, June 1o.-Ex-Presi-
lent William II. Taft wrote this after
noon the following comment on the
Minnesota railroad rate decision hand
ed down by the supreme court on
Monday Mr.. Taft finds the decision
in ultimate effect to be q victory for
the railroads.
The court while ~vindtcating the po-
sition taken by the State in the pres
emit case, nevertheless points the way
for the establishment of a superior
federal authority. Mr.. Taft says that
the only OF the interstate
railroads which chafed under State
supervision is to congress. which un-
der this decision has the power to
make uniform laws which will be eff
fective even within the borders OF the
States themselves
BY WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT.
/ hesitate to give the effect of the
decision of the supreme court in the
Minnesota rate case because l have
rot had an opportunity to read the
briefs OF counsel or the opinion of
MIR. Justice Hughes in full. But /
think j may safely say hat n of
the main issues was this: Whether
with the present federal instrumental
ties given by statute for regulating
interstate commerce in the interstate
commerce act and the jurisdiction Of
the federal courts, a remedy was af-
forded to the railroads engaged in
Interstate commerce to prevent a State
railroad commission from enforcing
an order In respect to the railroads
rates of transportation business with
In the, State. which prejudicially and
unJustly. n of necessity affected h
rates legally chargeable by it for in
terstate business
The court holds that gre has
complete power to control interstate
commerce. and to regulate 1t. and that
this necessarily includes the power to
regulate such business within State
lines as affects indirectly interstate
business. But that court holds that
until congress acts in respect to such
business within the State, 1t must be
left to the action OF the State.
Where the Railroads Lose.
It further holds that the present
interstate commerce act does not COW
ness by ITS terms and that in no other
statute had congress declared its in
tention to take ove control of this
class of State business.
The railroads, therefore, that deem
themselves prejudicially affected by
the State regulation OF State business
can fnd no remedy for their COM
plant in the interstate commerce
act or in any judicial proceeding
based upon hat act. To this extent,
the issue is decided against h rail-
roads. But the judgment OF the court
is a broad declaration in favor OF the
plenary power Of congress to vest the
interstate commission and
federal courts or some other APP
propriate instrumentality with the au-
thority to regulate and restrict such
improper or pre5udicial interference
with interstate commerce as hat fixing
by a State railroad commission Of
merely State rates may involve.
other Issues as to whether the rates
fixed by fhat State commission were
confiscatory OF the railroad property,
but they did not rest on the inter-
state clause Of the constitu-
ton. but on the fourteenth amend
ment, as to due process OF law, and
/ do not discuss them
The Chief Result.
The result OF the main issue Is a
great victory in principle for the pa-
Itional control of interstate commerce,
and the possession by congress of the
right to 8 every appropriate means
uniform, even where the means may
include an investigation and restric-
tion under congressional authority of
State-nxed rates on States business.
The only cource OF the interstate
railroads which have complaints Of
this kind, therefore. In to petition
congress for new legislation adopting
some proper . to permit the
railroads to secure consideration OF