Saturday news. (Watertown, S.D.) 19??-19??, 1919-06-05
Rate DECISION
and OUR COURT
Sioux City Journal

The decision Of the United States
supreme court that the states have
no authority to reduce the ~intra2tate.
freight and passenger rates on the.
railroads ard the same decision c N.
corning the authority of the states
in telegraph and telephone rates, set
ties the question of rate making a,a-
thority during the time the govern
ment exercises coptrol over these pub
lie utilities. The railroad ST it decided
was brought by the state offic ais Of
North Dakota to enioin the Northern
Pacific Railway company ana the
director general of the RAJ Dads from
collecting rates higher 7. n those
permitted by the laws of that state,
such rates being fixed by the state
railroad commissioners. TIE North
Dakota supreme court hald in favor
of the contention of the ,,+ate Off
cials and issued an INJUNCTION order
against the Northern Pacific railway
company prohibiting it from collecting
the express rates within tie state.
Similar cases We're pending from South
Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, NJ nnesota
and Washington, out the d~a,.sion of
the supreme court settles al! this litiga-
ton.
The Journal is not a offender Of
the high rates charged by the nan
aeement of the utilities taken over
by the government. but l. h,a had no
faith in the theory that the states
may set them aside on the grounds
advanced. For his reason The Journal
has advocated the return If the utili-
ties to private ownership under such
guarantees as mag be eNpedient, so
that the question of rate making may
lose its war Teasure qualities. The
cruz of the case vas whether the
United s LES wher it took over the
railroads obtained the power to fix
rates between points entirely within
the borders of q state. This right
has always belonged -,-to the state. In
times of peace it has not Teen ques
toned. But a new question entered
into the case Just decided. 1t was
whether the United States did not &C
quire q war authority over the utili-
ties which extended to interstate rates.
The safes contcr;led it did not. The
government contendel it did. The SUI
preme court sustains the governments
position.
IT is not necessary 10 inquire into
the actual needs Of operation by the
government of the utilities taken
| oYea.y II war eXists--if congress has
so declared and the president has not
proclaimed peace. t.lrs marking the
beginning and c 'ding OF war-the gov
arn1no. possesses Extraordinary low
crs whichsi MAY use arbitrarily OF
evcn despoticallv. Tle Wri: Of l.abeas
D the most sacred principle of
liholty, may he and has been suspend
eli rs a war nt:"slTe The cmancipa.
ton proclamation was questioned on
! constitutional grounds, but not as a
war measure. The admission into the
union of West Virginil as a state, be.
cause of the name in which it was
| searated fropm Virginia. was clearly
unconstitutional, but was never aHes
toned in the courts because its admis,
| sion was a war measure.
The contention of the North i)Sb>
ia authol ;ties in principle was thai
there was no implied war authority
in the constitution and that the instru
ment must be construed by the sans
| rules in times of war as in times Of
peace, that its limitations in favor OF
the states We're not enlarged by ex
traordinary conditions. In the light Of
history as we'll as the ~precedents OF
the supreme court itself, this position
was wholly ~untenable, as the unani
| nous opinion of the court indicates.
The authority conferred upon u1e
president by congress rs saeld "suprenlt
ard conclusive" though the state cen
tention is that neither the joint reso
luton of congress nor The railtoat
coltrol act Of that body authorized
the president to initiate ~intrastat,
rates. The court holds that such pow
er is conferred in both the resolution
and the statute, as Well Is inherent i,
the government as a war measure
This contention reverts back to TIL
original n whether the war power
Of the government are such that dur
ing h existence Of war t:ae constitu
tional limitations become suborlinnt
to the defense Of the nation and tina
a higher ]aw--tfat of national seeurit.
and defense--suranonnts them In mai
tiers essential to h preservation 9
the nation. Courts have so held in til
past. The present decision as no ii
noYation or j1dieial nsurpation 70
power. When the emerge 1w has pass
ed, the Interpretation u laws as IVA
measures ceases axe the Interpret
lions are based On peace conditions.