OCR Text |
Show Uncle Sam and the Interstate Highways ) INDIANAVOUS. A fresh encroachment encroach-ment by the federal government upon the rights of the states la seen- by Hooalers In a suit which baa been died by the United States In the stxte of Indiana. The suit Is to test the Jurisdiction of the United States' over Interstate highways. If the government wins It will mean that the United States has the same sort of general Jurisdiction over roads which run Interstate that It has over railways. The case which gives rise to this test suit 1 a unique one. The Lincoln highway runs through Indluna. The drainage commission of Indiana had an appropriation to rut an irrigation canal through one of the drainage districts. dis-tricts. The plans called for cutting the canal across the Lincoln highway. No appropriation was provided for building a bridge or for a detour road. The canal was cut right up to the highway when the state authorities, other than the drainage commission, got an injunction against the bisecting of the road. Then the United States government heard about the situation and Attorney General Sargent Instructed Instruct-ed the United States attorney for that Jurisdiction to sue for an Injunction. A temporary Injunction has been Issued Is-sued and the fight now is pending on a permanent Injunction. If the court upholds the position of the United State It will mean that the federal government ba a measur of Jurisdiction over Interstate highways. high-ways. The government has based It case upon two Important point. The Lincoln Lin-coln highway was constructed through federal aid. The government paid half the cost and the states halt Therefore, the government la In position po-sition to claim that It is protecting government property in seeking to prevent pre-vent the digging through the road. The more Important question, however, how-ever, Is that involving the doctrine of Interstate commerce. The second ground for the suit Is that Interstate commerce will be Interrupted by the digging of the canal across the road. It will be seen that the Implications of the case are very wide. If the court holds that the government has a sufficient suffi-cient measure of supervision over an Interstate highway to enable It to prevent pre-vent the cutting of this canal, the United States will have a precedent which will enable It to claim further rights. If this case Is won by the government govern-ment It would be In a position to say that it was authorlted to regulate traffic within the boundaries of state where the traffic was on Interstate roads. This might be carried an Indefinite In-definite length as Indlanlan see It. |