| Show WHAT CANNOT DO DOWe DOWe DOWe We have paid said hitherto that the North Carolina railroad ra 11 cases now pending before berON the tho Supreme Court are arc likely to make mako history when a decision is reached on thorn thom The controversy Is isas s sas as all to whether a II State law 1 fixing dicing a n rate rote of Z 2 cents a 11 mile for foras passenger as traffic is III a I reasonable regu atlon of ot railroad charges Tho The power of the or of ot tho thin Federal government Is not unlimited In n tile the control of ot corporations it has been shown that the State may do things in the tho exercise of ot Its au nu authority authority over corporations operating within Its boundaries but hut Us its limita limitations are uro almost ax as Important as III Its It II powers Wo We have seen leen that a state may nifty not net a u railroad r tariff or schedule of ot freight rates so eo unreasonable an as practically to destroy the value of the of companies engaged In the carrying business Neither can It regulate resul ite the tho charges nt tit all nil when power powel tins IBS been beell expressly given Riven to the tho rail rull load company to take e tolls lolls In Its dis lis discretion cretton that Hint I Is without any uny legislative reservation In Its charter n ns as to the tho regulation of ot tolls toils and charges charged nut Dot such luch exemption of ot n a railroad from legislative supervision must clearly ap pout In III Its charter for tOl thu courts make ako the presumption Ire that unless an on exemption lion tion In Is clearly Clear established the lature Is III free tree to 10 net let ap as tho the public In Interest terest may The charter of ot a II railroad corporation In Is regarded ns IR a contract which the State cannot violate by prescribing maximum rates when the terms term am arti cleur clear anti and express n that hint the legislature has hC grunted granted aWay nay Its right to regulate tolls and charges Nevertheless It II Is III held that Hie ho nature of Its occupation and pubic privileges a II rail railroad railroad road in lit bound hound to lo exact only a 11 reason ronson reasonable shin able compensation for tor the thu carriage of ot freight and anti passenger And this In 18 true trul Irrespective of nf what Its 1111 charter may contain Tho Tue Status Staten may nitty tax tho the property capital stock Mock receipts or franchises of 1111 corporations that thul are ure not tho ho dl di direel reel agencies nf cit the th Federal oderal l govern government ment In itt which case cane co tho the Staten cannot tax lIX them Tho fh States can lay hay la no tax taxes es en on ai tides exported or Imported ox copt capt for tor naro purposes H of at inspection nor 1101 lay ha unequal taxes lint Hut they may tax foreign domestic lIo corporations nt lit different rates State or nation may at any limo tIno tho the la laws under which corpora operate hut but It If int interests l been heen il under uner previous law 1111 these theae must ho bo protected tho law cannot annot vintage them Any tny may repeal a I law luw passed paNned liy by h n a former legislature hut but If Ir Ifan ifan an act net be lie done Ilona under a I law 11 a 1 sue suc succeeding legislature copilot cannot undo u it ithe he ll put past ba be o recalled br tw thy Ih mo t absolute to power po or Hence what nr are called V tod Interests cannot bo bri law lawfully iA fully Cully changed by later legislation The Th question U is whether or r not the th North Carolina law Is I a II con of nf tho the property of ot tho the roll rail roads roa and thus thull n a 1 violation of or the he con contract contract contract tract made by tho Ito State Bt t with tho the corn com companies when It granted thorn their charters They Thuy have havo expended their money mono relying on their charters Their interests are aro now vested under the tha law How ios tar far they can an be regulated l nt at this stage Is I one ona nO of at ho the most Interesting questions ever before the this courts courte u u |
