Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 19.pdf/625

 588

THE GREEN BAG

the Constitution is not after all what it has seemed to be all these years. That, as a matter of fact, although a contrary opinion has been unanimously entertained for a century, the federalists achieved in great measure the victory for which they strove. It is however true, that, on every hand, we hear not only suggestions of a broader control by the federal government of cor porations than the Constitution seems to warrant, but also arguments to the effect that, while the necessary power is not to be found among the enumerated powers in the Constitution, the desired result may be brought about under the inherent or sov ereign powers of government. The claim for federal control has been made by representatives of insurance inter ests as a measure of relief from state super vision, and by certain railroad officials for practically the same reason. One of the latter in a recent address, after stating that a railroad not engaged in interstate traffic is subject to the jurisdiction of the state, said: "When, however, it engages in inter state traffic by interchanging with other roads extending beyond the state, it thereby becomes interstate, and its situation under the law is entirely changed. It has become subject to the whole body of the federal law relating to interstate common carriers, and has removed itself from all state laws governing the same subject." He also said: "I believe that the capitalization of the railroads should be directly under the federal law, which would provide federal authority to construct and operate a rail road, the purpose of which is to engage in interstate traffic either over its own rails or through connecting lines." Officials and others have suggested vari ous schemes having for their object the bringing of railroads, other corporations and interests under the exclusive control of the federal government. To that end national incorporation has been proposed, as has also a federal license system, the plan of the

latter being to prohibit common carriers and others interested in commerce from participating in interstate commerce with out a license, the license only to issue upon an agreement to obey all federal require ments. The aim of the movement in so far as it relates to railroads and one of its purposes have been stated as follows: "There must be vested in the federal government a full power of supervision and control over the railways doing interstate business. It must possess the power to exercise supervision over the future issu ance of stocks and bonds, either through a national incorporation (which I should pre fer) or in some similar fashion. The fed eral government will thus be able to prevent ^11 overcapitalization in the future; to pre vent any man hereafter from plundering others by loading railway properties with obligations and pocketing the money instead of spending it in improvements." Another contention of far-reaching im port, is that the power of Congress to regu late commerce, which has been held to include the right to regulate the instrumen talities through which interstate commerce is conducted, involves the power to regulate the producer of articles of commerce which may or may not be destined to enter later into interstate commerce. It is insisted that any attempted regulation may be made effective by prohibiting the goods of the manufacturer or the crops of the farmer from the channels of interstate commerce. These various contentions, some of them so new and so startling, represent only a few of the many. The object which their advocates have in view is undoubtedly laudable. But that is not enough, if in the execution of their plans, they violate the Federal Constitution and directly lead toward the destruction of our dual government. Washington's solemn admonition, in his farewell address, as to our duty in such an emergency, should be faithfully adhered to. He said: "If in the