Press enter after choosing selection

Inter-state Commerce

Inter-state Commerce image
Parent Issue
Day
7
Month
May
Year
1875
Copyright
Public Domain
OCR Text

The Supremo ('ourt of tlic United Staten, in decidiug the capitation case betwcen tlie State i of Marylaud and the Baltimore anïl Ohio i road, went somewhat outwide of the record to give an opinión upou the general power of Congrens lo regúlate inter-Scate eommirce. The deeinion caimot fail to attrn't attpntion throughout the country, afi it practically anticipateb a cafie in the (rauger interents. and decide that CongrenHH under the Confetitution. ton the power to regúlate comimrcp between the Staten. Tiif ;i of the fftïteofMarylandagainHÏ theÜaltimoreand ( Umi road was a claim of Maryland ror 5!)fi.(i(n) Ciom tlint rmd onder h nrovision Of Uk obaitei of thnt rond whioh pröviaea that a certaiii capitation tax ahould be aunu&lly paid to the Htate in oconideratioii of the chartei'. Tl e railrod Mtr4 h pit tbt tbc provisión i ïtitutional in that it. is an impediment placed bv Maryland in the wny of commerce, and au obBtrui'tiou to tlie passage of citizens of i ntlior StateH through Jlaryland. The Supreme Court rnled that the aroement to pnv tlifi ! capitation taz íh a valid contract, and not uncoiiHtitulional. Tlie passage in the deoiwon relativo to the general power of Congreso over transportarían i sometbing in the nature of au dhiter dictum. The Conrt. in snbetauce, h;ivm : It is often iliilii-nlt te 4ram the line betweeu the power of State over eommerce and the provisión of the Constitation. It is indisputnble tlmt the State cannotimpede commeree in their tltemptH to rotúlate it. Tbc qucHtion irüitii-ally íh wliero tlie regal&tioc of oommeroe of a State endn and the obNt.ruot.iou to travel ; boginn. Tlio chief remedyof the public agailxst exoeesive tolla íh in competition. The questlon whether ("ongresH ha the power to j late inter-8tate eommerce haa oecupied the nost powerful niinds of ! tbe nmntrv. TIiíb power wig exereiHcd ! pleting tbe oM ('unibcrhtnd road and tbe Pacific , rsilroaa. It íh to be boped that no occasion will again ariHo to make the exerciñe of thiH power neccHHary, and that tbe States will uot be so regaídlcKH of tbeir owa interest as to , deavor to impose rewtrictionH upon travel. If i the States do tilia they may expeet that greHH. t. prote('t the citizens of the mtion, wil] exerciHe to tbo utmoHt degree it conetitutional power to control iuter-State commeree. The progresH of merehandise muBt be uuimpeded. Commercially, thiH íh one country, and general interest of tbe whole country dem&ois that thorc nhall be no interference with the due progress of commerce. No local intoreats can be permitted to interf ere with this great principie, but tho rights of the Statea must also be protected. líence, tho court decid that the charter of the Baltimore and Ohio railroad was a legitímate, reaHonable, and conHtitutionaJ contract with the State. The opinión íh unanimous, with the exception of Justice Miller, wbo dissents. His dissent goes to tlie points of the main case, however, and doeH not refer to the general statement as to the power of Congress over inter-State commerce.

Article

Subjects
Old News
Michigan Argus