Oregon Railroad & Navigation Co. v. Campbell

A state railroad commission has no power to fix interstate rates,' and as in 1 his case the state court has not construed an order of the state commission as relating to or-affecting interstate rates this court*does not so construe it.. Whether an order of the state commission governs particular shipments depends upon whether the traffic is interstate or intrastate, which . must be determined by the facts in each case. The question cannot be determined in advance by general decree. Minnesota Rate Cases, ante, p. 352, followed to effect that an order of a state railroad commission relating wholly to rates on intrastate shipments is not an unconstitutional interference with interstate commerce. .. . 177 Fed. Ilep. 318, affirmed.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON. The facts, which involve the validity and -constitutionality of an order made by the Railroad Commission of Oregon on April 22, 1908, prescribing máximum freight rates on railroads, are stated in the opinion. The State has exclusive jurisdiction over its .internal commerce. Howard v. Ill. Cent. R. Co., 207 U. S. 463; Milnor v. New Jersey Ry. Co., 17 Fed. Cas. 412; Ex parte Koehler, 30 Fed. Rep. 867; Allen v. O. R. & N. Co., 106 Fed. Rep. 265; St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Hadley, 168 Fed. Rep. 317; Woodside v. Tonopah & G. R. Co., 184 Fed. Rep. 358; Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Siler, 186 Fed. Rep. 176; Arkansas Rate Cases, 187 Fed. Rep. 290; Sou. Pac. Co. v. Campbell, 189 Fed. Rep. 182; Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 195; United States v. Chicago R. Co., 149 Fed. Rep. 486; Ex parte Plessy, 45 La. Ann. 80, 87; Sands v. Manistee Imp. Co., 123 U. S. 288; Willamette Bridge Co. v. Hatch, 125 U. S. 1; Wabash, St. L. & P. Co. v. Illinois, 118 U. S. 557; Luxton v. North Bridge Co., 153 U. S. 525, 532; Geer v. Connecticut, 161 U. S. 519, 531; Addyston Pipe Co. v. United States, 175 U. S. 211, 247; Erie R. R. Co. v. Purdy, 185 U. S. 148; Atlantic Coast Line v. Nor. Car. Com., 206 U. S. 1; People v. Butler Street Foundry, 201 Illinois, 236, 250; Attorney General v. Old Colony R. R. Co., 160 Massachusetts, 62; Chicago Ry. Co. v. R. R. Comm., 173 Indiana, 469; Central Trust Co. v. Railroad Co., 101 N. Y. Supp. 837; Larabee v. Mo. Pac. R. Co., 74 Kansas, 808; State v. Jack, 69 Kansas, 387; Beardsley v. New York, L. E. & W. R. Co., 15 App. Div. 251; Purdy v. Erie R. Co., 162 N. Y. 42; N. J. Fruit Exch. v. Railroad Co., 2 I. C. C. 84, 86; Hastings v. Railroad Co., 11 I. C. C. 675, 682; Farmers' Club v. Railroad Co., 12 I. C. C. 351. Railroads are subject as to their state business to state regulation which may be exerted directly by the legislative authority or by administrative bodies, endowed with power to that end. Calvert, Regulation of Commerce, p. 75; Beale & Wyman, Railroad Rates, §1307; Noyes, American Railroad Rates, 206; Cooke on Commerce Clause, § 23; Chicago R. Co. v. Iowa, 94 U. S. 155; Wabash, St. L. & P. R. Co. v. Illinois, 118 U. S. 557; Georgia R. R. Co. v. Smith, 128 U. S. 174; C., M. & St. P. R. Co. v. Minnesota, 134 U. S. 418; Chicago Ry. Co. v. Wellman, 143 U. S. 339; Covington Bridge Co. v. Kentucky, 154 U. S. 204; Reagan v. Mercantile Trust Co., 154 U. S. 413; St. Louis v. Gill, 156 U. S. 649; Smyth v. Ames, 169 U. S. 466; Dinsmore v. Southern Exp. Co., 183 U. S. 115; McLean v. Denver & R. G. Ry. Co., 203 U. S. 38, 49; Ware v. Mobile Co., 209 U. S. 405; Gulf, Col. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Texas, 204 U. S. 403; Atlantic Coast Line v. Nor. Car. Corp. Com., 206 U. S. 1, 19; General Oil Co. v. Crain, 209 U. S. 211; State v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co., 76 Kansas, 467 (aff’d 216 U. S. 262); Southern Ry. Co. v. Hunt, 42 Ind. App. 90; Commissioner v. Wabash Ry. Co., 123 Michigan, 669 (aff’d 126 Michigan, 113); Reagan v. Farmers’ L. & T. Co., 154 U. S. 362, 393; Stone v. Farmers’ L. & T. Co., 116 U. S. 307; Houston & T. C. R. Co. v. Mayes, 201 U. S. 321; McNeill v. Southern R. Co., 202 U. S. 543; Mo., K. & T. R. Co. v. Haber, 169 U. S. 613, 635; Chicago &c. R. Co. v. Solan, 169 U. S. 133; Penna. R. Co. v. Hughes, 191 U. S. 477; Northern Securities Case, 193 U. S. 394; Oklahoma v. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co., 220 U. S. 277; Oklahoma v. Chicago & Rock Island Ry., 220 U. S. 302. A state law regulating a subject of Federal jurisdiction would be void and a Federal law regulating a subject of state jurisdiction is also void. Trade Mark Cases, 100 U. S. 82; Ill. Cent. R. Co. v. McKendree, 203 U. S. 514; Howard v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 207 U. S. 463. The Federal Government has no authority over transportation which' begins and ends in a particúlar State. Baer Bros. v. Mo. Pac. R. Co., 13 I. C. C. 329; Hussey v. C., R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 13 I. C. C. 366; Haines v. C., R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 13 I. C. C. 214; Chandler Cotton Co. v. Fort Smith Ry. Co., 13 I. C. C. 473; Morgan v. M., K. & T. Ry. Co., 12 I. C. C. 525; Montgomery Freight Bureau v. Western Ry., 14 I. C. C. 150; Marshall Oil Co. v. C. & N. W. R. Co., 14 I. C. C. 210; Lincoln Commercial Club v. C., R. I. & P. Co., 13 I. C. C. 319; Saunders & Co. v. Southern Exp. Co., 18 I. C. C. 415, 422; Gulf, Colo. & S. F. R. Co. v. Texas, 204 U. S. 403; Coe v. Errol, 116 U. S. 525; Michigan Buggy Co. v. G. R. & I. Ry. Co., 15 I. C. C. 297; Howard v. Ill. Cent. R. Co., 207 U. S. 463, 502; Wells-Higman Co. v. Grand Rapids & R. Co., 19 I. C. C. 487. The interference with interstate commerce that is forbidden is direct, not that which is remote or indirect. Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 113; Stone v. Farmers’ L. & T. Co., 116 U. S. 307; Wabash, St. L. & P. R. Co. v. Illinois, 118 U. S. 557; Budd v. New York, 143 U. S. 517; N. Y., L. E. & W. R. Co. v. Pennsylvania, 158 U. S. 439; Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Kentucky, 161 U. S. 677; West. Un. Tel. Co. v. James, 162 U. S. 650; Hennington v. Georgia, 163 U. S. 299; Chicago Ry. Co. v. Solan, 169 U. S. 133; Lake Shore Ry. Co. v. Ohio, 173 U. S. 285; Wisconsin Ry. Co. v. Jacobson, 179 U. S. 287; Louis. & Nash. R. R. Co. v. Kentucky, 183 U. S. 503; McNeill v. Southern Ry. Co., 202 U. S. 543; Gulf, Colo, & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Texas, 204 U. S. 403; Ware v. Mobile Co., 209 U. S. 405; New York v. Hesterberg, 211 U. S. 31; Mo. Pac. Ry. Co. v. Larabee Flour Mills Co., 211 U. S. 612; Louis. & Nash. R. R. Co. v. Kentucky, 183 U. S. 503, 518; Alabama & V. Railway Co. v. Mississippi R. R. Comm., 203 U. S. 496; Covington Bridge Co. v. Kentucky, 154 U. S. 204, 209; Houston & Tex. Cent. Ry. Co. v. Mayes, 201 U. S. 321, 328; Penna. R. Co. v. Hughes, 191 U. S. 477, 488. Interference by the State with interstate commerce being unlawful will not be presumed. Chicago I. & L. Ry. Co. v. Railroad Commission, 95 N. E. Rep. (Ind.) 364, 368; N. Y. Cent. R. R. Co. v. Int. Comm. Comm., 168 Fed. Rep. 131; Pittsburg R. R. Co. v. Railroad Comm., 171 Indiana, 189; Chicago R. R. Co. v. Railroad Comm., 173 Indiana, 469; Stone v. Farmers’ L. & T. Co., 116 U. S. 307; Burlington C. R. & N. R. Co. v. Dey, 82 Iowa, 312, 339; Howard v. Ill. Cent. R. Co., 207 U. S. 463, 509. When the charge and the actual transportation are confined to the limits of the territory of the State it is not interstate commerce and is. subject to state control. Morgan v. M., K. & T. Ry. Co., 12 I. C. C. 525, 528; Montgomery Freight Bureau v. Western Ry. of Ala., 14 I. C. C. 150; Marshall Oil Co. v. C. & N. W. Ry. Co., 14 I. C. C. 210; Kurtz v. Penna. Co., 16 I. C. C. 410; Savannah Bureau v. Charleston & Savannah R. R. Co., 7 I. C. C. 601; Gulf, Colo. & S. F. R. Co. v. Texas, 204 U. S. 403; Dobbs v. L. & N. R. Co., 18 I. C. C. 210; Southern Ry. Co. v. Hunt, 83 N. E. Rep. (Ind.) 721; Wabash, St. L. & Pac. R. Co. v. Illinois, 118 U. S. 557; Coe v. Errol, 116 U. S. 517; Brown v. Houston, 114 U. S. 622; State v. Engle, 34 N. J. L. 425; State v. Carrigan, 39 N. J. L. 35; The Daniel Ball, 10 Wall. 557; General Oil Co. v. Crain, 209 U. S. 211, 228. .The law requires all rates to be reasonable, state as well as interstate, and if a carrier uses a local rate in any way as a factor in arriving at an interstate rate it does so knowingíy and subject to state control. Reagan v. Mercantile Trust Co., 154 U. S. 413; Reagan v. Farmers’ L. & T. Co., 154 U. S. 362; Ames v. Un. Pac. R. R. Co., 64 Fed. Rep. 165, 171; Armour Packing Co. v. United States, 209 U. S. 56, 82; Beale & Wyman, R. R. Rate Regulation, § 661. The reasonableness of a local raté ought hot to be measured by an interstate rate over the same line where part of the haul was within and part was without the State. Louis. & Nash. R. Co. v. Eubank, 184 U. S. 27. A rate is a definite charge for a whole service. Gulf, Colo. & S. F. R. Co. v. Texas, 204 U. S. 403; Southern Ry. Co. v. Hunt, 42 Ind. App. 90; State v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co., 76 Kansas, 467; Coe v. Errol, 116 U. S. 517; Texas &c. R. Co. v. Sabine Tram. Co., 121 S. W. Rep. 256; State v. Southern Pacific Co., 23 Oregon, 424; Augusta Brokerage Co. v. Cent. of Ga. R. R. Co., 5 Ga. App. 187. Traffic is either state or interstate. Trammel v. Clyde Steamship Co., 4 I. C. C. 120, 139; Wells-Higman Co. v. Grand Rapids &c. I. Ry. Co., 19 I. C. C. 487; Dobbs v. L. & N. R. Co., 18 I. C. C. 210. A rate fixed by a State which indirectly affects an interstate rate is not an unconstitutional interference with interstate commerce. Mo. Pac. R. Co. v. Kansas, 216 U. S. 262, 283; Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Siler, 186 Fed. Rep. 176, 200; Arkansas Rate Cases, 187 Fed. Rep. 290, 302; Gibbons v. Ogden, 6 Wheat. 448; Employers’ Liability Cases, 207 U. S. 463, 493; Addyston Pipe Co. v. United States, 175 U. S. 211, 231; State v. Nor. Pac. Ry. Co., 120 N. W. Rep. (N. D.) 869; Nor. Pac. Ry. Co. v. North Dakota, 216 U. S. 579; L. & N. R. Co. v. Kentucky, 183 U. S. 503; Perkins v. Nor. Pac. Ry. Co., 155 Fed. Rep. 453; Woodside v. Tonopah & G. R. Co., 184 Fed. Rep. 358; So. Pac. Co. v. Campbell, 189 Fed. Rep. 182; Shepard v. Nor. Pac. Ry. Co., 184 Fed. Rep. 765. A through rate may properly be lower than the sum of the locals. Minn. & St. L. R. Co. v. Minnesota, 186 U. S. 257; Brabham v. Atlantic C. L. R. Co., 11 I. C. C. 464; Morgan v. M., K. & T. Ry. Co., 12 I. C. C. 525; Montgomery Freight Bureau v. Western Ry., 14 I. C. C. 150; Marshall Oil Co. v. C. & N. W. R. Co., 14 I. C. C. 210. Courts in cases of doubt will'not declare a law unconstitutional. Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cranch, 87, 128; United States v. Coombs, 12 Pet. 72, 76; Sinking Fund Cases, 99 U. S. 700, 718; Nicol v. Ames, 173 U. S. 509, 514; Buttfield v. Stranahan, 192 U. S. 470, 492; Interstate Ry. Co. v. Massachusetts, 207 U. S. 79, 88. . Other state acts havn been held constitutional. Railroad Commissioners v. Pensacola & A. R. Co., 24 Florida, 417, 472; Storrs v. Pensacola & A. R. Co., 29 Florida, 617; Georgia R. Co. v. Smith, 70 Georgia, 694; S. C., 71 Georgia, 863; Sou. Ind. Ry. Co. v. Hunt, 42 Ind. App. 90; Sou. Ind. Ry. Co. v. Railroad Commission, 172 Indiana, 113; Chicago I. & L. R. Co. v. Railroad Commission, 95 N. E. Rep. (Ind.) 364; State v. Mo. Pac. R. Co., 76 Kansas, 467, 481; Michigan C. R. Co. v. Railroad Commission, 160 Michigan, 355, 366: State v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. Co., 38 Minnesota, 281; State v. Great Nor. Ry. Co., 100 Minnesota, 445, 476; Stone v. Yazoo & M. V. R. Co., 62 Mississippi, 607, 645; In re Railroad Commission, 16 Nebraska, 679; Trustees v. Saratoga Gas Co., 191 N. Y. 123, 131; Atlantic Exp. Co. v. Wilmington R. R. Co., 111 Nor. Car. 463, 472; Minn. &c. Co. v. Railroad Commission, 136 Wisconsin, 146; State v. Railroad Commission, 52 Washington, 17, 32. Legislative power is not unconstitutionally delegateby similar acts. Miller v. New York, 109 U. S. 385; Field v. Clark, 143 U. S. 649, 680, 691, 692; Buttfield v. Stranahan, 192 U. S. 470; Union Bridge Co. v. United States, 204 U. S. 364, 371; St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co. v. Taylor, 210 U. S. 281, 287; Oceanic Steam Nav. Co. v. Stranahan, 214 U. S. 320, 339; Monongahela Bridge Co. v. United States, 216 U. S. 177, 192; United States v. Grimaud, 220 U. S. 506; Hannibal Bridge Co. v. United Stales, 221 U. S. 194; Int. Comm. Comm. v. Brimson, 154 U. S. 447, 474; Int. Comm. Comm. v. Cincinnati &c. R. Co., 167 U. S. 479, 494, 506; Tex. & Pac. Ry. Co. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co., 204 U. S. 426, 438, 448; Int. Comm. Comm. v. Ill. Cent. R. Co., 215 U. S. 452; Balt. & Ohio R. R. Co. v. United States, 215 U. S. 481; Int. Com. Comm. v. C., R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 218 U. S. 88; Int. Com. Comm. v. C., B. & Q. Ry. Co., 218 U. S. 113; Sou. Pac. Co. v. Int. Com. Comm., 219 U. S. 433; Del., L. & W. R. Co. v. Int. Com. Comm., 220 U. S. 235. The action of the. commission has the effect of law. Knoxville v. Water Co., 212 U. S. 1; Prentis v. Southern R. Co., 211 U. S. 210; Honolulu Rapid Transit Co. v. Hawaii, 211 U. S. 282; Tex. &. Pac. Ry. Co. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co., 204 U. S. 426; Atlantic Coast Line v. Nor. Car. Corp. Comm., 206 U. S. 1; Tex. & Pac. Ry. Co. v. Mugg, 202 U. S. 242; Tex. & Pac. Ry. Co. v. Cisco Oil Co., 204 U. S. 449. The power of the legislature is absolute within; the limits of the Federal and state constitutions. Cooley, Const. Lim., 7th ed. 236, 241, 257; St. L., I. M. & S. R. Co. v. Taylor, 210 U. S. 281, 295; Int. Comm. Comm. v. Ill. Cent. R. Co., 215 U. S. 452, 470. A rate made under legislative authority is presumptively lawful. Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 113, 123; Ruggles v. Illinois, 108 U. S. 536, 541; Sweet v. Rechel, 159 U. S. 380, 392; Chicago &c. R. Co. v. Wellman, 143 U. S. 339, 344; San Diego Land Co. v. National City, 174 U. S. 739, 754; Chicago &c. R. Co. v. Tompkins, 176 U. S. 167, 173; Louis. & Nash. R. R. Co. v. Kentucky, 183 U. S. 503, 511; Knoxville v. Water Co., 212 U. S. 1, 8; Willcox v. Cons. Gas Co., 212 U. S. 19. The legislature may exercise its rate-making power through a commission. Noyes, Am. Railroad Rates, p. 206; 2 Redfield, Railways, 6th ed., p. 606; Railroad Co. v. Cent. of Ga. Ry. Co., 170 Fed. Rep. 225. No rate can be said, as a matter of law, to be unreasonable of-itself. Ill. Cent. R. Co. v. Int. Com. Comm., 206 U. S. 441; Tex. & Pac. R. Co. v. Int. Com. Comm., 162 U. S. 197; C., N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Int. Com. Comm., 162 U. S. 184. The commission' is an expert body. Smyth v. Ames, 169 U. S. 466, 527; East Tenn. V. & G. R. Co. v. Int. Comm. Comm., 99 Fed. Rep. 52, 64; Steenerson v. G. Nor. Ry. Co., 69 Minnesota, 353, 377; Minn., St. P. &c. Ry. Co. v. Railroad Comm., 136 Wisconsin, 146. In passing upon the reasonableness and justice of a rate the conclusions of fact by the commission are conclusive. Ill. Cent. R. R. Co. v. Int. Comm. Comm., 215 U. S. 452; Balt. & Ohio R. R. Co. v. United States, 215 U. S. 481; So. Pac. Co. v. Int. Comm. Comm., 219 U. S. 433; Del., L. & W. R. Co. v. Int. Comm. Comm., 220 U. S. 235; Int. Comm. Comm. v. Chicago &c. R. Co., 218 U. S. 88, 110; Knoxville v. Water Co., 212 U. S. 1; Willcox v. Cons. Gas Co., 212 U. S. 19; Monongahela Bridge Co. v. United States, 216 U. S. 177; Ill. Cent. R. R. Co. v. Int. Comm. Comm., 206 U. S. 441, 454; Cincinnati, H. & D. R. Co. v. Int. Comm. Comm., 206 U. S. 142, 154; Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Int. Comm. Comm., 162 U. S. 184; Louis. & Nash. R. Co. v. Behlmer, 175 U. S. 648; Steenerson v. Gt. Nor. Ry. Co., 69 Minnesota, 353, 375; State v. C., M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 38 Minnesota, 281, 298; Foreman v. Board, 64 Minnesota, 371; State v. Young, 29 Minnesota, 474; Reagan v. Farmers’ L. & T. Co., 154 U. S. 362; Minn., St. P. &c. Ry. Co. v. Railroad Comm., 136 Wisconsin, 146; Chi., R. I. & P. R. Co. v. Railway Comm., 85 Nebraska, 818, 824; Spring Valley Water Works v. San Francisco, 82 California, 286, 306; Jacobson v. Wisconsin Ry. Co., 71 Minnesota, 519, 529; Morgan’s Ry. Co. v. Railroad Comm., 109 Louisiana, 247, 265; In re Amsterdam, 33 N. Y. Supp. 1009; People v. Railroad Comm., 53 App. Div. (N. Y.) 61; Pensacola R. R. Co. v. State, 25 Florida, 310; Storrs v. Pensacola Ry. Co., 29 Florida, 617: Railroad,Comm. v. Seaboard Air Line, 48 Florida, 129. . It is presumed the commission acted lawfully. Atlantic Coast Line v. Florida, 203 U. S. 256; Cumberland Co. v. Railroad Comm., 156 Fed. Rep. 834; Railroad Tax Cases, 92 U. S. 575; State v. Savage, 65 Nebraska, 714, 768; Re Cruger, 84 N. Y. 619; San Jose Gas Co. v. January, 57 California, 614; Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Babcock, 204 U. S. 585, 598. Confiscation cannot be predicated of a single rate or group of rates, but must be judged from the effect on the entire business done within the State. Willcox v. Cons. Gas Co., 212 U. S. 19; Atlantic Coast Line v. Nor. Car. Corp. Comm., 206 U. S. 1; Minn. & St. L. R. Co. v. Minnesota, 186 U. S. 257; St. Louis & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Gill, 156 U. S. 649, 665; Southern Ry. Co. v. Atlanta Stove Co., 128 Georgia, 207, 233; Wisconsin &c. R. Co. v. Jacobson, 71 Minnesota, 519; State v. Mo. Pac. R. Co., 76 Kansas, 467; Pensacola &c. R. Co. v. Florida, 25 Florida, 310; Morgan’s R. Co. v. Railroad Comm., 109 Louisiana, 247; People v. Railroad Co., 176 Illinois, 512; Union Traction Co. v. Chicago, 199 Illinois, 579; Reagan, v. Farmers’ L. & T. Co., 154 U. S. 362, 412; Smyth v. Ames, 169 U. S. 466, 544; San Diego Land Co. v. National City, 174 U. S. 739; Covington Turnpike Co. v. Sandford, 164 U. S. 578, 596; Jerome Hill Cotton Co. v. M., K. & T. Ry. Co., 6 I. C. C. 601; So. Pac. Co. v. Bartine, 170 Fed. Rep. 725. Many elements, are to be taken into account in determining the reasonableness óf a rate. Int. Comm. Comm. v. Chic. G. W. Ry. Co., 141 Fed. Rep. 1003, 1015; Beale & Wyman, R. R. Rate Regulation, c. XI, § 314; Imperial Coal Co. v. P. & L. E. R. Co., 2 I. C. C. 618; New Orleans Cotton Exch. v. I. C. R. Co., 3 id. 534; Thompson Lumber Co. v. I. C. R. Co., 13 id. 657; Dallas Freight Bureau v. G., C. & S. F. Ry. Co., 12 id. 223; Noyes, Am. R. R. Rates, 25. A carrier may complain of a reduction of rates by the commission so far as it affects its revenues; but cannot complain that discrimination results to shippers or trade centres from such reduction. Int. Comm. Comm. v. C., R. I. & P. R. Co., 218 U. S. 88, 109; Clark v. Kansas City, 176 U. S. 114; Smiley v. Kansas, 196 U. S. 447.