Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[graphic]
[graphic]

11TH, 12TH, 13TH AND 14TH SEMI-ANNUAL REPORTS,

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

CAMPBELL WALLACE, Chairman,

L. N. TRAMMELL,

ALEX. S. ERWIN,

A. C. BRISCOE, Secretary.

COMMISSIONERS.

REPORT.

OFFICE OF THE RAILROAD COMMISSION OF GEORGIA,
ATLANTA, GA., October 28, 1886.

To His Excellency, Henry D. McDaniel, Governor, Etc.:

}

SIR: We have the honor to present the following statement of the operations of the Railroad Commission since the date of our last report.

So far as the action of the Commission is embraced in the circulars issued from time to time, it can be readily understood by reference to the circulars which are hereto appended, and which, in each case, shows on its face the object for which they were issued.

It will be seen that four new railroad companies, namely: Dublin & Wrightsville, Rome & Carrolton. Americus, Preston & Lumpkin, and Buena Vista & Ellaville have applied to the Commission for a tariff of freight and passenger rates. These have been furnished and the roads are now operating under them.

Questions of much importance, involving sections of the Act creating the Railroad Commission, have come before us and have been decided.

The first is the case of Atlanta Chamber of Commerce against the Southern Railway and Steamship Association. The nature and character of this case, the ruling of the Commission therein, and the grounds on which the ruling is based and fully set out in the decision, which is hereto attached.

The next were the cases of Jno. N. Dunn and Aaron Haas against the East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia, and the Western & Atlantic Railroad Companies. These cases involved a construction of section V. of the Act creating the Commission, and particularly the proviso to that section.

In each of these cases the constitutionality of certain parts of that Act was assailed. The Commissioners, however, restricted their decisions to a construction of the different sections of the Act in question, and declined to consider or determine the constitutional objections made. By the Constitution of the State, the duty of pronouncing upon the constitutionality of laws is entrusted to the Judiciary Department of the Government. In our view, the Commission is not a branch of the Judiciary of the State, but is a legislative agency, created to perform certain legislative duties, which can be more conveniently performed through that agency than is practicable by the direct action of the Legislature. This is the view of the character of the Commission, taken by our own Supreme Court, and by Mr. Justice Woods, in what is known as the Tilley case, in the United States Circuit Court at Savannah. In the cases of Dunn and Haas against the railroad companies, which were heard together, a demurrer was interposed upon the ground that it would be a violation of the provision of the Federal Constitution, which reserves to Congress the exclusive right to regulate commerce among the several States, for the Commission to take jurisdiction of the cases and grant the relief prayed for; and by the Western & Atlantic Railroad Company, upon the further ground that that Company, by virtue of its contract of lease with the State, is not subject to the operation of the law creating the Commission. These demurrers were overruled in the decision which is appended to the report. The decision went no further; we

« AnteriorContinuar »