Dow v. Beidelman
Citation | 8 S.Ct. 1028,125 U.S. 680,31 L.Ed. 841 |
Parties | DOW et al. v. BEIDELMAN. 1 |
Decision Date | 16 April 1888 |
Court | United States Supreme Court |
[Statement of Case from pages 680-685 intentionally omitted] [N.M. Rose, for plaintiffs in error. [686]
John H. Rogers, for defendant in error.
The general rule of law that governs this case has been clearly stated and developed in opinions of this court, delivered by the late chief justice. In Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 113, decided at October term, 1876, after affirming the doctrine that, by the common law, carriers or other persons exercising a public employment could not charge more than a reasonable compensation for their services, and that it is within the power of the legislature 'to declare what shall be a reasonable compensation for such services, or, perhaps more properly speaking, to fix a maximum beyond which any charge made would be unreasonable,' the chief justice said: Id. 133, 134. In Railroad Co. v. Iowa, Id 155, decided at the same time, a corporation having a perpetual lease of the railroad of another organized under the general corporation law of Iowa of 1851, c. 43, with the same powers as private individuals to make contracts, as well as the power to establish by-laws and make all rules and regulations deemed expedient for the management of its affairs, in accordance with law, was held to be bound by the subsequent statute of Iowa of 1874, c. 68, entitled 'An act to establish reasonable maximum rates of charges for transportation of freight and passengers on the different railroads of this state,' by which those railroads were classified according to the gross amount of their earnings per mile for the preceding year; and the compensation per mile, which those of each class might receive for the transportation of a passenger with ordinary baggage, was limited to three cents, three cents and a half, and four cents, respectively. Laws Iowa, 1874, p. 61. The chief justice said: Id. 161, 162. The same rule was affirmed and acted on in several other cases decided at the same time, in the first of which the chief justice, in answering 'the claim that the courts must decide what is reasonable, and not the legislatr e,' said: Peik v. Railway Co., Id. 164, 178; Railroad Co. v. Ackley, Id. 179; Railroad Co. v. Blake, Id. 180; Stone v. Wisconsin, Id. 181. Upon like grounds in Ruggles, v. Illinois, 108 U. S. 526, 2 Sup. Ct. Rep. 832, and Railroad Co. v. Illinois, 108 U. S. 541, 2 Sup. Ct. Rep. 839, (decided at October term, 1882,) the statute of Illinois of April 15, 1871, (Laws Ill. 1871, p. 640,) which classified the railroads in the state according to their gross annual earnings per mile, and put different limits on the compensation of the different classes per mile for carrying a passenger and his baggage, was adjudged, in opinions delivered by the chief justice, to be constitutional and valid, in restricting to the limit of three cents a mile existing corporations, whose charters gave them power to make all by-laws, rules, and regulations not repugnant to law, and gave their directors power to establish such rates of toll as they should by their by-laws determine. And two justices who did not assent to those opinions concurred in the judgments, because it was not shown that the rate prescribed by the legislature was unreasonable. In Stone v. Trust Co., 116 U. S. 307, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 334, 388, 1191, decided at October term, 1885, the obligation of a contract, created by a charter granting similar powers to a railroad corporation and its directors, was held not to be impaired by a statute of Mississippi establishing a board of railroad commissioners charged with the duty of preventing the exaction of unreasonable or discriminating rates upon transportation done within the limits of the state; and the chief justice said: 'It is now settled in this court that a state has power to limit the amount of charges, by railroad companies for the transportation of persons and property within its own jurisdiction, unless restrained by some contract in the charter, or unless what is done amounts to a regulation of foreign or interstate commerce.' 116 U. S. 325, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 342. He added, however: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Utah Power & Light Co. v. Public Service Commission
... ... 636, ... that "it is not [107 Utah 167] to be inferred that this ... power of limitation or regulation is itself without limit ... This power to regulate is not a power to destroy, and ... limitation is not the equivalent of confiscation." ... In ... Dow v. Beidelman , 1887, 125 U.S. 680, 690, ... 8 S.Ct. 1028, 31 L.Ed. 841, the court reverted somewhat to ... its original enunciation of the Munn v ... Illinois case and expressed doubts that it could in ... any case nullify rates established by state legislatures. Up ... to this time all the discussion ... ...
-
George Simpson v. David Shepard No 291 George Simpson v. Emma Kennedy No 292 George Simpson v. William Shillaber No 293
...such rates either constitutes a direct burden upon the interstate commerce or is repugnant to the Federal statute. In Dow v. Beidelman, 125 U. S. 680, 31 L. ed. 841, 2 Inters. Com. Rep. 56, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1028, the statute of Arkansas, enacted in April, Page 424 WHICH ESTABLISHED 3 CENTS A......
-
Francis Wilson v. Alexander New
...585, 11 Ann. Cas. 398; Missouri P. R. Co. v. Kansas, 216 U. S. 262, 278, 54 L. ed. 472, 479, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 330. 9 Dow v. Beidelman, 125 U. S. 680, 31 L. ed. 841, 2 Inters. Com. Rep. 56, 8 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1028; Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. Arkansas, 219 U. S. 453, 55 L. ed. 290, 31 Sup. Ct......
-
State of Missouri Southwestern Bell Telephone Co v. Public Service Commission of Missouri
...6 Sup. Ct. 334, 388, 1191, 29 L. Ed. 636; Mr. Justice Harlan, 116 U. S. 341, 6 Sup. Ct. 388, 29 L. Ed. 636; Dow v. Beidelman, 125 U. S. 680, 690, 691, 8 Sup. Ct. 1028, 31 L. Ed. 841; and Reagan v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., 154 U. S. 362, 409, 412, 14 Sup. Ct. 1047, 38 L. Ed. 1014; where th......
-
Reviews : Growth of Nationality in the United States: A Social Study. By JOHN BASCOM. Pp. ix, 2I3. Price, $I.25. New York: G. P. Put nam's Sons, 1899
...and bethe sole judge of reasonableness; the court has since assumed foritself the right to determine reasonableness. (Dow v. Beidelman,125 U. S. 680; Reagan v. Farmers’ Loan and Trust Company, 154U. S. 362; Smythe v. Ames, etc., 169 U. S. 466.)Pennsylvania State College.CARL BECKER.English ......