Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1915-02-02
FIGHT ON TWO-CENT
PASSENGER FAREUP
TOSUPREME COURT
Attorneys for Missouri Pacific Con.
tend that People Have Dele
gated Rate Making Power
to Railroad Commission.
LEGISLATURE ACTS, SAYS REED
Attorney General Contends No
Power Exists to GO Behind the
Specific Act of Lawmakers.
JUDGES SITTING EN- BANG

(From a Staff Correspondent
LINCOLN, Neb., Feb. .-(Spe-
ciaI. Arguments In the 2-cent fare
case we're heard before the supreme
court this morning, the high tribunal
sitting en- banc, with Chief Justice
Morrissey. recently appointed, pre-
siding for the first time
The case was brought by the Mis-
s,,uri Pacific Railway company to
compel by mandamus the State Rail-
way commission to take jurisdiction
of and act upon its application for
ar Increase in it's Nebraska passer-
ger rates above the 2-cent minimum
fixed by statute.
The nub Of the question is; Does the
constitutionally delegated power Of the
commission have precedence over specific
Legislative enactment9 The railroads so
argue, contending that II it sees fit the
commission may increase the rate over
that provided for by the Legislature
of 1907,
Rate Power Delegated.
3 The ra1lrOdqS mAfntdiH tueS as NOaoT
gated TO the commission by the people
the ratesmaking power cannot be taken
over by the legislature. The contentious
are based on this constitutional provision;
s'rhe power and duties OF such COM
mission shall include the regulation OF
rates, service and other general control
of common carriers as the legislature may
provide by law.
.,But in the absence of specific 1esisla-
ton the commission shall exert the
powers end perform the duties enumer-
ated in this provision"
The state, through former Attorney GEN
eral w. T. Thompson and Attorney Gem
eral Reed, insisted that specific legisla-
fIon by the states law-maldng BODY Is
had in the 2-cent fare law and that the
state Railway commission cannot go be-
hind that.
Discretion Extensive.
Further. state attorneys held that II the
state Railway commission had power
virtually to repeal the ,2-cent fare law
II could do likewise with the ano-paos
law ar other legislation affecting rates OF
service Of railroads.
The railroad side OF the case is sum
rnarizsd in the following:
That the commission has unqualified
jurisdiction to legislate with reterencs "
rates and service of common carneIs-
that this power was deie IS an amend "a
nent TO the state constitution.
THAT the legislature by its makeup is
incapable OF determining rates-tnaH ~
admitted this at the 1913 session w ,,. ~ ~
refused TO pass the KeclSley rate Dill ana
agreed to leave this power IN the hands
81 the State Railway commission.
: q THAT the supremacy OF the leglsiature
over powers delegated 20 the commission
BY the people would defeat the purpose
OF the amendment.
4 That in delegation 10 the con ,eatteTa
The S,eopje'g wishes and not those OF the
legislature are respected.
Legislature Has spoken.
The state maintains that IN the consti-
tutional provisions cited above, the lines
sshut In the absence Of specific legislation,
ate % MEAN that the commission can have
M povvers where the legislature has
enohen. that the commissions power Is
limited even in rates and service matters
10 acts not touched upon in specific leg
islative enactment.
Thus the legislature would have no
power to disturb the accent passenger fare
law. save, perhaps. to reduce It, II the
state attorneys view is. accepted by the
high bench.
But az there are no maximum telephone
rates fixed by the legislature, she COM
mission has power TO regulate those as II
may see fit. Were a rate law to be
PASSED by the legislature according to
the -vicw of the state attorneys-that
would supersede all rate control the COM
mission might exert over telephone com
panies.