Year: 1874

stitutionality of the law to the last ISSUE


In the famous suit against the Vino


ma and ST. Peter Railroad Company in


Minnesota, decided by the Supreme Court


of the State on appeal about year ago,


the right of the Legislature to regulate


tolls was affirmed. The Company held


that its charter left it at liberty to estab-
lish its own rates, and this right could


not be abridged without impairing the


validity of contract. The court deci-


ded, however, that the Legislature in


granting the right to take toll had not


surrendered its sovereign authority to fix


some limit to that toll. The question in


Wisconsin is somewhat different. Sever


al of the companies affected by the law


are understood to maintain that their
charters expressly authorize them ito
demand and receive such tolls and char


ges as they may from time to time think


reasonable" This is not unlikely to be


true for the Western Legislatures in


many instances encouraged the building


of new railroads by granting charters of


extraordinary liberality, and they after


wards discovered to their sorrow that


they had paid dear price for the impe-
! tus thus given to their Development.
| The rules laid down by the Dartmouth
| college decision would SEEM therefore, to
apply to the Wisconsin cases, although
they were not admitted in Minnesota.
The counsel for the companies raise the
further objection that the limitation of
| rates is a partial confiscation of earnings,


and may even prevent the payment of


interest on the companys obligations,
the result of which would be violation
of the contract between the railroad and
its bondholders.


1t is to be hoped that the important
points involved in this controversy. may
be carried without unnecessary delay to
the Supreme court of the United States,
so that one of the most difficult problems
of legislative interference with railroad
tariffs may at least be taken out of poll
tics. But if the highest tribunal in the
country should affirm the constitutional
ity Of the disputed laws, we do not be-
lieve the farmers difficulty would be one
whit nearer conclusion than it is to-
day. Attempts to regulate transporta-
ton charges by acts of the Legislature
have uniformly failed wherever they have
been tried They have failed in Eng
land, where Parliament is almost omnip
otent, and they have been abandoned by
all experienced and far-seeing econo-
mists In one way or another, the rail
roads, always come out of the contest
victorious-and in the United States
there are obvious reasons why their vic
tory must be prompt and easy. Even,
however. if the court should sustain the
law and the roads should submit to it,
the farmers would gain no benefit. Their
market is not in Wisconsin; it is in
New York The eastern termini of the
Wisconsin trunk roads are all practically
at the sea coast The moment a bushel
of grain crosses the Wisconsin border it
is beyond the reach of Wisconsin laws.
How are State Commissioners at Madi-
son going to determine the price at
which carload of wheat shall be laid
down in this city? And if, by an act of
or by concurrent legislation of
the separate States a maximum tariff of
freights could be established, strictly pro 8
rata, from the West to the sea board, the
remoter districts would be absolutely
shut out of the market, and road which
happened to be more circuitous than an
other would have to suspend bust
ness because the law would virtually
compel it to charge more than its COM
oetitor. The report of the Committee
On Transportation Routes, made recently
to the House of Representatives by Mr..
disposed of the favorite falla-
,y that nothing but statute is necessary
to secure cheap transportation and if
the researches of the committee have
no other effect than to convince the
United States of this truth, which older
countries discovered long ago, their Ia
0ors will certainly have been worth
While.