The New York Herald Newspaper, January 21, 1874, Page 4

4 REGULATION OF RAILROADS Powers and Duty of Congress Under the Constitution. oe es COMMERCE, INTER-STATE - Report of tie House Committee on Railroads and Canais n Favor of Federal Regulation of Freights, fares, Tolls and Charges Upon {uter-State Railroads. WASHINGTON, Jan. 20, 1874, ‘the followin. 18 the fll text of the report sub- nritted to the Lovee Of Representatives to-day by | Mr, Meerary, 0! [OW chairman of the Commitree on Railways aud Canal Rep thes on Rail ys aud Canals, to whom Ouse Dui NO. 4, “A bal to regu y railroad mong the several me under considera:ion ampanying amendment substitute, and recom- adgment of the commut- 41}0R NOW proposed Is roper astatement, in toe House, of sume ‘of the | it ‘is believed not | Without bul, atit | The Commi ce e haw ae the uxture of AD the so LINPOT GAME as (0 un o @ Pepe pal grouids justly bus Bt » the which vemand its adeption. ting M detak here the provisions of Our present purpose to say t sud ducy Of Congress to regulate on by railroad, nd prescites as one of the regnlations thereof mab The cla gos ul persons engaged in suca com- ari yuls (reebt aud passengers shall in | run reasonable, @ detusis oe: (he Dill we do not speak here, a. Wellenouth be discussed @ se- Suy that their purpose 18 (and adapted to it) to adopt aad eniorce, ‘ naities, as one of the rmies or reguiatious ¢ ng commerce carried on by railro Ge wine Lhe Slates, the taking oF no more than fair oud reasonaole toll or compensa- tien, Belore any discus-ion of details it 1s necessary to consider au. derertwine, first, whether the ead thus sought can be attained by a constitutional | act o! Congres», aw mit, Whether, i constitu. tional, it Is € Let us consider these questions in their vrde The (on iscutional Question, | transport internal commerce of a Ntate, then, may be considered as reserved for the State itselt. , GOVERNMENT REGULATION OF RAILROADS. Aiter showing that m regulating commerce with foreign nations the power of Cupgress does not Siop at the jurisdictional lines of the several States, but may be exercised wherever the sub- Joct exisys, the Court proceeds to say > This principte is, it possible, still more clear, when | avplied to commerce among the several States’ They jovn each‘other, in hease they are separated by & Mathematical line; or, they are remote trom each other, Heh Case Ocler state Lines lie between them. What is “commerce” “among them, and how as it to be com ducted? Can a trading expedition between two ing States commence and. te: miuate a And ir the trade; remate fiom eae 8 work on Constitntional Lim- Judge Cooley, in es if ad other cases on italions, atter rererring to Lis & the subject, says:— it 28 not doubled that Congross has the power to go beyond the general regula sions of commerce, which it hs accu ted to estabhisa, and to descoud to the most min- Ute direcuons, if it shall be deemed to Whaiever extent ground shall b directions, the exe stitutivnal L Tue ve que’stia 5 now unde: consideration is discussed ana aecided by Mtr. Justice Miller, of the supreme Court oi the United states, in the case oi Clay vs. The Clinton Br.dge Company, reported by the n Law Kegister im Jahuary, 1868, From the v bie and CORCUSiVe Opidion ta That case We quote as 1ollows:— however, is only one of the an clement ot comimerc hs of teat se age an lise 1c wa interchange arried on ominerce as Well &y When carried on by » bower of Congress to re it is as | ave as in the ober, tke commerce oken of in the coustiaution nist at nen A have beow ueatiny 5 , Which lias created eon the rivers, was then nw this poriauon or by land His nat waier, tor si commer: ct our great internal unatown Another m to the steamboat bh constituuon Was 4 Mise is) transpo same velucte shares with th DLC pol. ry.ug trade he one has, with great sub ected to the control of salutary Congr nal iegiska ton, we it is Wn imstramentof ecommerce Is there any reason why the oh shoud now! however this qucstion may be answ: f in regard io that comme: which C ad Wholly within the limits of a = ' H nor coun where tese Waye of our Unio pmmerce hich embraces many ang desured, of these roads are, to through whi-h the nations of Euro; e e their eommoditi there can be no at to regula s to regulate cot merce both with foreign nations ai mony the States; and that (o rerise te do this is a reidsai to discharge one of The Woo Lnpurtanl dunes ol the sederal goverament. | As aiready iitimuied, the with whieh the Giterent states telured co their « ual in importance ¢ reason in Among the powers expressly conferred upon Congress by section 8 artich of the cou: ton, is the pow rs “io regulate commerce W foreign nativus suc along the several states and With the Iudian c.bes.” In considering 1 tion whether, udev this provision, Cen; power to pass tue bul reported, it will be unueces- sary Co iuguire us to the navure and extent of tue power conerred Oy this provision upon Congress, | it will not be deuic t hat this clause of the consti- | tution coniers fongress by express words power to i¢ upon the general | Subject Of the regulation of commerce among tue | several states. itis not @ negative provision; it dovs not deciare what power Congress shall not | have; it is nob iuerely prokibitory. It is artic | tive. It deciares that Congress “shall have power,” | &c. In order to siow that this provision o: the | constitution authorizes Congress to pass the bill reported it is hecessary to establish the following propositions :— 1. That the “commerce among the several States” whica way be regulated by Congress in- clades commerce carried irom State to State by railroads, 2 ‘That to regulate the charges for carrying freight or passeners upou inter-State ratiroads, | so as to limit them to what is air and reasonabie and prevent extortion, is a legitimate exercise of the power to egniaie such commerce, These propositions are abundantly supported both by reason aud authority. The term ‘com- merce, employed tn the constitution, undoubt- edly Dieans mtercourse and exchange both of persous aud property between different States and communities. 1t veiers to the commerce itseli, and not to the particular manner in which it is carried on. If tt could be held to apply to the latter, and il it could be shown that Lue corstitational pro- vision in question was Confined iv its operation to commerce to be carried on by the same mode in existence when the constitution was adopted, ali commerce among the several States might escap: regulation by abaudoning entirely the vehicles ia use in in tus way the plaim provision of the constitution might be vallitied if this construction of it could be sustained. Upon this subject Judge Redfield, in his atue and exhaustive work ou whe law of raliways, Has this to say: ‘The natura! import and construction the conariiuuou Weusd not seem to admit of much doubt, judging tro anguaze merely. The meaning ot the word “comm t the tme the constitution was adopted must Lave veen definitely settied and weil enough undersioo |. The word, as is well understood. is derived trom the Laon comiercium, whieh is found almost in Its origiaal iorm in most of the languages of modern Kurope. ii means, in its most literal sense, tercourse and exchause both of persous and comtuodi- ties. It as more nearly synonymous with tratfc than with any other word ‘in the language, probably. Its breat natural, divisions tor ages have been foreign and inland, ‘The on of ail the jormer and that portion. ot the Iat- ch exten ied beyond the limits of # single State law our ma f the terms of e orga’ governwen', secured to the nati d the re. maincer was naturally ett to the particular State Xisted. It is obvious that the pur- pose of the provisions was not to be eontined two future commerce carried ou in the same mode it Was then—i. by ship and boat navigation propelied exclusively by wing, If that had been so, the provision could no: have been applied to that large por.ion ol commerce now catried on by steam power, which has already. become and. is\ constantly increasing in # rapidly advancing ratio. © * © The that the entire subject ot different states, inc by which it was carrie: and that, therea.ter, (he /tates were to hay Teut action in the regulation of the same, Ww Teduce the question of regulating inter-S traftie to the single inquiry, Whether it tion of the commerce of the’ country w! qu be regulated at all? Those who assume to argue that | Congress has no power to regulate the traffic upon these extended lines 0 railways reaching from one end of th Union to the other must, if they Woula mee: the ques- tion fairly, either say the trafic on these extended lines of railway, auwouning to many millions aunualiy—prob- bly ten timesas much as the entire commerce ot ty at the time of tae adoption of th commerce at ull, or, if it be, tion or control whatever: for it is c have neither the power nor capacity jose oF wih any efficiency, th c. It mus’, then, come under the control o or be left to its own devices and impulses. ment never yet tried in any other country Railways, pp. In the great case of Gibbons vs. Ogaen, 9 Wheat. 1, which arose and was decided in 1824, When steam navigation Was in its inianey, it was held that commerce com) renended navigation as well as in- tercourse and trafic, and no doubt was expressed as to the right of Cougress to reguiate it when carried on by an agency not Known wuen the constitution was adopted—to wit:, the power of steam, On the contrary, the power to regulate inter-State and toreign commerce, when carried on by means of steam vessels, was dis- tnetly asserted; and if extended to steam vessels why ot to steum cars, since they were alike un- known when the coustitution was adopted? ‘The opinion in this case (Gibbons vs, Ogden) was delivered by Chiet Justice Marshall, and it dis- ‘cusses 80 abiy the very quesion we are now con- sidering—viz., the na‘ure and extent of the power ven to Congress to regulate commerce—that we 1 constrained to quote irom it, as follows:— The subject to be regulated is commerce; and our con- stitution beinz, as was aptly said at the bar (by Mr. Web- ater), one of retuneradion and not of definition, to ascer- tain the extent of the power it becomes necessary to settle the rE ty the es counse! 0: the appellee would limit it to traffic, to buying and selling, or the intercaange of commodities, and do not aumtt fuat It comprehends navigation. This Woult restrict a general term, applicable to many ob- ts, 19 ONE Of Jissignifications. Commerce, undoubtedis, ; but it i something mor mtercourse, It J intercourse between nati Lits branches, and Isr rying on that intercour: ainong the Congress Mu experi- (Raddeld on describes the commer and paris of pauous, in by preseribing ruses ior And again :— To what commerce does this power extend? The con- stitution informs us:—to commerce with toreign nations and ai several States and with the Indian tribes. It has, we believe, been universally admitted that hese ‘words comprehend every species of commercial inter- course between the United States and joreizn nations No sort of trade can be carried on between this countr and any other to which this power does not extend. It has been truly said thac commerce, as ti a is in the constitution, is a uwuit, every part o: wir indicated by the term. If this'be the admitted mean ot the word in ite application to foreign nations tm carry the same meaning throughout the sentence and Temain a unit, unless re be some pluin, inteiligivie Clause which alters it. The ct to which the power is next applied is to ‘among (he several States.” fhe word "means “intermingled with. A thing whieh 1s ong others as intermingled with them. Commerce wong the states cannot stop at the external boundary Jine of each state, but may be introduced into the fi- terior. {tis not intended to say that these words comprehend thet commerce w internal, which is ich is completes d nan in a Staie or between State, and which does not * Sach a power wonld be is not necessary. Compre- ls, it may very properly be ‘ ce which concerns nore tates Jhrase is not one which would probably Wah Seach, th, comely smn State, s Notan apt pod, the’ fan apt phrase for t commerce to which the pow: not have been made bad the inte Dower to evel carried on betwe differen: parts of the on extend to or affect other inconvenient, and ‘cert jonsive as the word if We regard the ny must be the exclusively int And here foliows from the pen of this gre jurist, and as tue announcement of the Suptonng Court, perhaps the best definition of the jine a. aoe the State from tne federal jurisdic. ion which can anywhere be found, It ig in ti following word ms The gevius and character of the whole governmen seem to be that its action isto be mpplied tean theron: ternal concerns of the nation. and to those internal con- _ affect the sta.ex generally, but not to th are completely within a partictilar state wh: hot affect other States, ih whien it is not neces- sary t interiere for the’ purpose of executing some of te general bowers of the wovernment, The cumnlerly ets to benelit tuemsely the expense of contede Was one of the main cai oy h lea to che formation ot our present constitution. exciuoively under Un has jusutied the w y remit the cost valuaule p to the controi of the states, and to the con- burdens which the vermmen bare we mere rived ont ng iu pose ry Wl mnst ail this be permitted because the carry by a uicthod uot thought of when the consiitu as iramed > For myselt Pmust say 1 have no doubtot the right of Congress to prescribe ail ne per nm toms tor Uh uduet of tis i r auy railroad which has volaniarily become part of one 0: those Tin inier-State cominunication, or to aa- | tuorize the creation oi: such roads, when the purpeses of interstate transportation Of persons and property justity or require it. The recent decision of the Supreme Court in the se of the State freight tax (15 Wallace, 232) ems to the committee entireiy conctusive o1 tie question we are consideving. in that case inter- Stuie commerce by raiiway was held to be we Snoject exclusively OL Conzressional control and regulation, and # stature of the State of Pennsyl- vaniu was held to be unconstitutional and void it attempted to do tiat watch the Court to be in the nature of a reguiation of that merce The regaianon attempted by the state in the shape oi a tax upon freight carmed oy acy raiiroad or other transportation company “doing business wituin the State of Pennsyivania.”’ The Court hed that th.s was a regulation of com- merce, aud being such, in so far as it applied to inter-state commerce it Was unconstitu- twual ‘fhe Opinion in this case is itself an admirable and exhaustive treatise upon x y question we are considering. Its con- clusion 18 (hat tae State can make no law in the a ion of commerce which can (akea Up Within the State and or taken up in other States and her limis." In delivering the | carried out, bronght within | epinion of the Court Mr. Justice Strong said:— tion the transportation of freight or of merce tor the purpose of exchange or | shu T all qi Beyond the ee douote: and probably Ue transporte rucle one state lo another Was ihe promment i eminds of the trainers ot the constitution when | to Congress was commnited the power to regulace com: merce among th veral Siai Nor does tt make any ditieredce wuecher us interchange ot com- modities is by land or by water, In either case ihe bringing of the goods from the seller to the buyer is com- merce. It is by no means important, in order to establish the power of Congress to pass the bill reported, tuat It should be made to appear that the power of Congress over mter-stute commerce is exclu- sive. ‘Lhe power is ample, whether it be exclusive ornot, Lutit seems to the committee that the case first cited is conclusive of the question and leaves no douvt that the power of Congress 1s ex- clusive. Upon this point the Court say:— Iris not necessary to the present case to go at large into the much in Whether the power given to Congre A among the States is of this Court it was said to haye been 0 entirely in Congress that no part of it can be exercised by a State. It has, indeed, oiten been argued and some- times intimated by ‘the Court that so far as Congress has not legislated on the —_ subject the States may legislate specting inter-State com- merce. Yet. it they vhy inay they not add regula- lations to commen nations, beyond those made by Congress, if not inconsistent with them? for the power over both ‘foreiga and inter-State commerce is comterred pon the tederal legisia y the d3; and certaluly it has never yet been deci art that the power ty regulate inte: is not “The exclusively in Con: whenever the subjects ov to regulate commerce is asserted are in their aiure national, or adrait o1 one uniform system or pla of regulation, ley may jusily be said to be of such @ n ture as to require exclusive | gislation by Congress, Sarely transportation of passengers or merchandise through a State, or irom one State to another, is of this nature.” These anthorities leave no room for doubt con- cerning the power of Congress to regulate that commerce among the several states which is now carried on by meaus of rauroads. They establish conclusively that the power of Congress extends to ail commerce which concerns more than one State, and that it necessarily includes the carrying Of ireigut and passengers trom a place mm one State to a place in another State. It reaches and con- trois that commerce which is beyond the reach of any single State because not completely internal ‘Wiliun any one State The Regulation of Charges. This being settled, we come to the consideration of the second proposition, which is, that the power to regulate commerce may be exercised by enact- ing, as proposed in the bill reported, that persons and companies engaged in it as public or common carriers shall charge no more than reasonable rates for such and stall im no case be extortion. It would seem almost self-evident that to so regulate charges is to regulate commerce, The term “regulate” signifies to fix or establish rules, or regulations for the government or control of some particular thing. Hence it wag said by Chief Justice Marshall, in Gibbons vs. Ogden, that “commerce is regulaved by prescribing the rule by which Congress is tobe governed.” Can there be a doubt but that to fix the rate of toll or compensation to be taken by those engaged in car- rying on commerce is to prescribe such a rule % Let st be remembered that we ure not now to con- sider whether the prohibition of unreasonaole charges is @ reasonable regulation or not. The question is hot whether such @ regula- tion is YFeasonable or unreasonable, proper or improper, expedient or inexpedient, but simpiy, whether it ts a regulation. If it prescribes a rule to be followed in carrying on commerce then it is a regulation of commerce. That it does prescribe such a rule is plain. The Tule prescribed is that, “in carrying on commerce upon railroads between points In different States reasonable rates may be charged and not more,” If that is not @ regulation, whai is it? The power of Congress upon this subject has no limitation other than those prescribed in the constitution itself, Upon this subject Chief Justice Marshall, in his opinion, aiready cited (Gibbons ys, Ogden), used the jollowing strong language :— It is the power to regulate that is to prescribe the rule by which commerce is to be governed. This power, lke ail others vested iu Congress, is complete in itself: may be exercised to its utmost extent and acknowledges no Mmitations, other than are prescribed in the constitu. | tion. ‘These are expressed in plain terms and do not atlect the questions which arise in this case and which have bee lat f,as has always been gress, though limlted Uhose subjects; the power over commerce with foreign nations and ainong the several States is vested in Congress as absolutely as it Would be tna single government, having im its con stitution the same restrictions on ‘the exercise of the power as are found in the constiution of the United states. ‘The wisdom and discretion of Congress, their identity with the people and the intluenee which their constitt ents possess at elections, are in this, asin many other instances, as that, for instance of declaring war, the sole restraints on which they have relied to secitre them from tte abuse, They aré restraints on which the people must rely solely in all representative governments, If the language here quoted gives the true mean- ing of the constitution, of which there can be no count, then the power of Congress in the matter of controiling and regulating inter-State commerce, is coextensive with the power ol the States over their completely internal commerce and, If the power of a State over its OWN commerce is, for any rea- son, less than “plenary,” then the power of Con- gress within its sphere is hg mrad finn than ‘hat of sach State, for the power of Congress can be Nmited only by the terms of the constitution of the United States, It will hardly be claimed, how- ever, at tuis day, that a State has no power to fx or limit the ‘ges Of rauirvads within its terri- tory. That they have such power is now generally conceded. The vower of the State over the rail- } merce by State law is, as Judge Kedfleld well says, | such commerce is to prescribe such a rule? The’ propo- ment of persons engaged in carrying on com. merce is a legitimate exercise ot the power ‘to regulate such commerce will appear still road commerce within ite limits is net derived from the fact that i are chartered by the State, but it is derived frow the fact that railroads are public highways, and, therefore, necessarily subject to legislative control, @ very recent case (Uleott vs, The Supervision, 16 6Wallace, 618) Supreme jourt of the United States iv, ‘That railroads, though constructed by private corporations and owned by them are public hways, ‘This has been the doctrine of nearly all the courts ever since such conveniences for p: and trans- portation have had any existence, Very early the question arose whether a State’s right of emiuent domain could pe exercised by a private corporation created ior the purpose of constructing @ railroad. Clearly it could not, unless taking land for such a purpose by such an agency is tak- ing land tor public use. The right of eminent domain nowhere justifies taking property for a private use, Yev it is a doctrine universally ac- | cepted thata state Legislatare may authorize a | private corporation to take land ior the construc- ion of such # road, making compensation to the owner, What cise does this doctrine mean it not that building @ railroad, though it be built by o private corporation, is am act done for a pri- vate use? And the reason why ‘tor public uses that such road ts a highway, Wuether made by the | goverument or by the agency of corporate bodics, or even by mdividuais when they obtam their bower to construct it trom Jegisiative grant. It woud be useless to cite the DumMerous decisions to this effect which have been made im the State courts, We may, however, refer to two or three, waicu exntbit not only the doctrine tvsel, but the reasoa upon which It rests. Whether the use ol a iroad is a pablic or a private one depends in no measure upon the question Who constructed 1t or who owns it It has mever been cbn- sidered a matter of any importance that te read wa built by the agency of a * corporation, No matter who is the agent, function performed 1§ that of the State. wh the owuersmp is private the ase ys public. So vurupikes, bridges, ferries and canals, although made by imdividuais under public grants or by companies, are regarded as pubtict juris, The right toexact tolls or charge freyrhts is granted tora service to the public, Tae owners may be private companies, but they are compellable to permit the pubic to ase their works m= the manner in which such works can be used, all persons may not put thetr own cars upon road aud use thelr OWN motive power has no bearing apon the question whether the road is a | public highway. [t bears only upon the mode of | use Of which the Legislature 1s the exclusive | judge And inthe same vase the Court sa) “the ratiraad an, therefore, be controlled by the State. its usé can be defined; its tolls and rates for transportation may be limited.” And, since Congress may make any regulation concern- erce among tae States, whick the State erming that which 18 completely in- ternal, it follows that since the tatter may be reg- ulated by limiting tolls and raves ior transpor tio SO imay tie former. Lt would indeed be strange anomaly ifa lide of railroad, operating in but ove State and engaged in local commerce oul) sheuid be held suoject to legislative control in re spect to tts charges, While @ great through hae, crossing the territory of many States and largely engaged in commerce among them, capable 0! be- comlug, if uncontrolled, a Vast aad dangerous mon- opoly, should be heid free from such control, An«t yet Such is the inevitable consequence of a denial of the power of Congress to Limit charges upon inter-State lines while granting to the states power to limit such charges upon lines within their borders. The regulation o1 Inter-State com- ‘simply impossible,’ for the plain reason that the laws of a State can have bo extra-territorial force er. (Reafield on Railways, vol. 1, page 722.) im the case of the State freight tax, already cited in this report, the Court held that a tax upon tae ton Oi freight carried from one State to an- other was a regulation of commerce among the States, and, theretore, that no State can lay or collect suca @ tax. In delivering the opinion of the Court, Mr, Justice Strong said:— hen why is not a tax upon freight transported from State to state a regulation of inter-state transportation and theretore a regulation of commerce among the is it not prescribing a rale for the transporter by which he is to ve controlied in bringing the subjects of commerce into the State and in taking them out? Can any one tail to see that to fix rates for the trans. pocter by which he is to be coutrolied in carrying on sition that to fix reasonable rates tor the goveru- more clearly when we consider t at common law it was a violation of the obligation of @ common carrier to charge unreasonable or excessive compensation for the discharge of any of his duties. It advocates, 1 a re- cent argument agamst the validity of the Illinois law Upon ths subject, and made on behalf of the Chicago and Alton Kailroad Company, that coummon carriers acting under a charier or without one are alike lable for any abuse of ine public In thelr charges, (See arguinent ot ce ‘Kwith in the report of the Mlinols Commissioners jor 1872.) And the authorities fully sustain this proposi- tion. Carriers of goods aud passengers who set themselves be.ore tue public a8 ready to carry tor all who apply become a kind of public officer, and owe tothe publica general auty, independent of any coutract in the particnlar ci (Redticia on Carriers and Railroads, si Tai in Thorpe vs. Railroad Company, Vermont, 150, the Supreme Court of that State say: There is also the general public power of the State, by which persous aud property are subjected to all kinds of restraints and burdens in order to secure the general comiort, health and prosperity of the State; ot the per- fect ri in the Legislature to do which no. ee n acknowledged general principles ever mad F natural reasons are concerned and it Gs certainly calculated to excite surprise an r alarm that the right to do the same in regard to rail- ways should be made a serious question. Mr. Parsons, in his work on contracts, vol. 2, p. 175, distinetly recognizes the right to fix by law the rates to be taken by a common carrier when he says:—"Where required by statute to make a reasonable and equal charge against all, ne (the common carrier) cannot by bylaws or rules dis- crimmate as to amounts or modes of compensa- uon according to their occupation, but must carry the same amounss the same distance for the same price tor all persons.” And again, on page 205, he Says cumpensation of common carriers “is some- times fixed by jaw, as for incorporatea companies, ferries,” &c. ‘The authorities upon the sublect are numerous anc unsorm, aud they leave no doubt as to the Tight to limit by law the charges of common car- riers to such ag shail be reasonable; for they show cleany that such a law is simply declaratory of the common law itself, The English Parliament has repeatedly enacted laws to regulate tiie rates to be charged by rail- Way and canal companies, and these laws have been construed and eniorced by the courts of that country in many cases. it hag been well said that the English statutes were enacted to correct abuses for which the common law, by the method of its procedure, aid not aiford adequate remedies, Is the authority of Congress, wnen exercising powers conlerred upon it by the consiitation, more limited than that of Parliament + We think not. According toChief Justice Marshal! in Gibbon vs. Ogden the power of Congress in the matter of regulating commerce among the States is plenary, and certainly that o! Parliament can be no greater. It will be observed that the question of the power of Congress to create or charter a corpora- tion to operate a line of commerce from State to State and to exercise the right of eminent domain is not involved in the passage of the bill reported. It ts, however, well settled vy decisions of the Su- preme Court of the United States that Congress may charter a corporation, which is a necessary or prover instrument for carrying into effect aay of the powers of the generai government, (Osborn vs. United States Bank -of Wheaton & Co.; McCul- Jough vs. Maryland, 4 Wheaton, 411.) In the latter case the Court, by Chief Justice Marshall, said:— “The power of creating a corporation is never used for its own sake, bat for the purpose of effecting something else. No sufMicient reason is, therefore, perceived why it may not pass as incidental to those powers which are lel given, if itbea direct mode of executing them.’* If, therefore, Congress should deem it necessary, in the exercise of the power expressiy conferred, to reguiate commerce among the several states, to charter new lines of railroads or canais as chan- nels of such commerce, its power to do so would seem beyond question. Let us consider tor a mo- Ment the consequences which must result from a denial of this power. If it does not exist, why may not any State reiuse to permit any adequate sacilities lor the passage of the commerce of other States across its territory? If this power is not in Cougress it would only ve necessary for a State to decline to charter @ Fallroad or to authorize the construction of @ canal to accomplish the virtual destruction, in many instances, of the commercial interests of @ neighboring State or section: or, if Congress has no power in the premises, what is there to prevent a State {rom compelling all commerce passing through its territory to pass over a single inne, to pay tribute to a single corporation and to a single centre? Is it possible, for example, that the State of New York, extending, as she does, from the ocean to the great lakes, could perma- nently interrupt and cut off commercial mver- course by railroad between New England and tue West, and Congress remain powerless to afford a remedy? ‘The right of eminent domain is an attribute of sovereignty and it belongs of necesstiy to every sovereignty. it belongs to the States undoubtedly for all legitimate purposes, that is to say, for any purpose under their own sovereignty, It belongs to the national government also, and may be exer- cised by it whenever needful to the complete and effectual exercise of its powers, If this were Dot so the United States conid not erect a fort or an arsenal, 4 lightiouse, custom house or post office within any one oj the States if the State should refuse to condemn and take, and the private owner should reiuse to seil and convey, the necessary land for the purpose, This whole question has recently been considered by the Su- preme Court of Michigan In the case of Trombley vs. Humphrey, Auditor General (23 Michigan, 471). An elaborate and exhaustive opinion was deitvered in that case by one of the ablest jurists in the coun- try (Judge Cooley), and we content ourselves with referring to it and qnoting from it the conclusion reached by the Court as foliows :— Under the division of power between the United States and the individual States each has its sphere of sovereignty, within which It moves out Jet or hindran sand within that sphere it employs the eminent domain whenever needful to the complete ‘and effectual exercise ot its powers, a With as little occasion or Necessity tor the permission or assistance of the otuer as if the two governments were Wholly toreign to each other, instead of heing constructed as parts of one harmonious system, It has been insisted that Congress cannot regu- Jate inter-state commerce when carried on by rail- roads, because the railroads themselves are char- tered by the States, and therefore exclusively under their control, But the answer is obvious. Congress does not Interiere jor the vurpose of | sunje regulating and controlling inter-State commerce, Af this distinction is Kept in mind the aimculty suggested must disappear. It cannot for a. mo- ment be conceded that persons engaged in com- merce among the States can escape supervision and control by beimg incorporated in the several States thro or into which they carry their operations, ‘The rigat of Congress to ate such commerce cannot be made to depen the corporate character of the agents by which such commerce is carried on, The right of a State in general to control ail corporations of & public character which it creates 1s not questioned; but that this right can be carried to the extent of creating @ corporation and authorizing or per- mitting it to engage in inter-Stae commerce, aud by that means taking that commerce out of the controt of Con; is emphatically dented, ‘The power of tne State to control its corporations must be exercised with reference to those subjects over which the State has jurisuiction, and to such contracts, transactions and engagements a8 are to be reguiated ana controlled by State law, Those who tnsist that the corporate exist- ence aud character of the railroad companies cf the sountry are an insuperable barrier to Cezsres sional legislation upon this subject must assume the position that the tates, by char- wring companies for carrying on inter- = | State commerce, can deprive Congress of its coustitutional powers in the premises, That such & position 18 wholly untenable is clear, The power of Congress to regulate commerce exists independently of the means or agencies by which that commerce is carried ou. Steamboat companies engaged in the navigation ol our great rivers are frequently and, we believe, generally mcorporated under Stace laws, but it has never been urged that for this reason tue commerce carriec on by these companies is beyond the control of Congress, The Questioa of Expeiiency. There are already in the United States over iles ol ratiway, and the system is yet in its » The commerce curried on by this means is vast and rapidly increasing. It is to be pre- sumed that no one will claum that all this immense commerce ought to remain permanentiy exempt irom legislative control or regulation, If there could be a doubt Gpon this subject the most casual investigation would remove it. The rates charged tor railway transportion are, a3 a rucc, the result combination, such a thing as honest competrtion ing systematically avowed. Upon this subject Mr, Charles Francis Adama, Jr., tn a recent speech delivered betore a commitice of the Massachusetts Legislature, has stated the facts so forcibly that we quote as follows :— Where capital and. industry are free to flow no monopoly can exist. Now, whit is the case as regards raliroads? You, gentlemen, pertectly well know that wherever combination 18 posible ditis the shrewd aphor- ism of old George Stepheusan) competion 18 impossibie. The only thing whici can enable compedsion to exist is the presence of compeling forces too aumerous to coni- bine, Look abroad over this country and you Will see at a glance what competition amounts to so tar ay Tail- rouds are 0 E 3 Bi entleman committee knows that not a rate is charged be- n New York and Chicago which is no! established by. combination, You know that every time the tariif is to be raised oF lowered slo freight | agents of the se companies meet in conyen- tion, and decide how much it shall be raised or how much it shall be lowered, and the change agreed upon tak ect upon all the Toads on a given day. You know. y man who has looked into this t knows —that the only compeuttion which exists is between land transportation and water trunsporta- tion; and when water enters into the straggle—when navigation opena—then the treight agents meet and rates are reduced. When the lakes freeze up then the treizht agents meet again and the rates are raised. Whether reduced or raised, however, the change is aiways the result of combination. Again, let us look at this ques- tion trom another point ot view. The idea of competl- tion certainly inplies the existence of several agents. As regardy railroads, however, even the combination of competitors is litnited to a’ few localines Except at competing poinis—points, that is, upon which railroads converge—transportation by rail is a pure, absolute monopoly, affecied only by municipal law an considerations ot’ self-interest, and’ in no degree subject to the influence either ot competition or of supply and demand. Now, how iarge a portion of all the towns on our railroads ure points of railroad. convergence? In other words, how muny of them can look to competition for even a'preteuce ‘of protection against imonoply ? Take, tor example, the Boston and Albany read. It runs through a deusely inhabited a filled with manu.ac- turing cities and towns; It is miles in length; it has cignty swopping places: but of points. ot railroad con- vergence—places at which a possibility of compe- tidon existe—it numbers just seven. Take, agai the Central Railroad of “New York, Including its Auburn division it has 400 mites or road in the very gar- dep and central thoroughfare of the continent. On the whole 400 miles there exist just vine poinis of converg- ence—1,60) miles of railroad, with 16 « eting points f And those inhabiting all the other localities may use the Central or the Boston and Albany, as the case may be, or they may stay at home, whichever they preter, Bui is it not something of & mockery to refer this system tor its regulation to the principles which control the production of boots and cotton cloth? And it this 13 so here tn the manufacturing East itis not hard two imagine waac must result in the agricultural West, where the very navure of the leading industry renders it ampossible for the popula- tion to concentrate ut points of rallroud convergence. In the West the mass of the people feel themselves heipless, and hence the angry teeling now prevailing against the yatlroad companies throughout that region. The facts here stated are not doubted by any weil intjormed person. In tlustration of their truth it may be mentioned that within the past 30 days it hasbeen announced in the public press that certain officials representing the great through lines, at a meeting held in the city of New York, have increased their rates of ireignts trom the West fully 33 per cent, to take effect on the first day ofthe present mouth. Tuis was an agree- ment among the railroad ollicials, to be entorced by virtue oi their control of several great mono- polies as against the producing classes, wo furnish the cargoes which taey are to carry, and tie con- suming classes, Who must purchase and pay ior them ; but neither of these latter have had any voice in the matter, As one oi the results of cnis system it may also be mentioned that on the 30¢n 01 Veceinver, 1978, @ bushel of Wheat was worth 45 cents more in New York than in Chicago, and 4 busvel of corn was worth thirty-five cents more im the latter than in the jormer city, the difference being mainly ab- sorbed by the Cost of transportation. ‘Tuat the rates Charged Jor this Carriage aie unreasonably high ts bevond dispute, It nas been claimed by well informed experts beiore your Committee that grain can be carried irom Cnicago to New York at a@ lair profit for avuut twelve cents per bushel; but, whether this be so or not, there is no doubt put that when the price charged is twice or thrice that sum it is exorbitant: and when it 1s remembered that about 46,000,000 tons of freignt was carried by these trunk lines in the year 1872, robavly one third of which was Western products. tS Will af ouce be seen how important and how Vital to the interests and rights of the people it is that some otuer imterest and some other power than the combined interest and power of these great monopolies should be invoked in the regula- tion ot these charges. 4 We assume therefore that this commerce by rail- Toad shoaid be controlled and regulated by law. Of course the laws witch shail secure this regula- tion and control must be either national laws or State laws or both. It has been ciaimed that State legisiation is of itself sufficient, but a ittle reflection will show that tuis is an error. Your committe are not disposed to. recom- mend the slightest encrouchment by tue federal government upon the rightul domain of State legislation, and we say distinctiy that in so jar as a remedy for these evils can be lound in Jocal or State laws to that extent snould the remedy be -ought in that direction. But the proposition that inter-State commerce cannot be controlled and regulated by State laws is too plain for argument. The great trunk lines, or through lines 4s they are called, must be regulated by national law or not regulated at all. They make contracts to carry freight from the Missouri River to the Atlantic, and even sometimes from one ocean to the other, without change of cars, in the transaction of their immense pusiness tuey make no note of State lunes, ‘True, they may be chartered by some One or ail Of the Staves whose territory they traverse, but they beg 4 all intents and purposes one line operating in*’and through many States, We have already seen that any State law at- tempting to regulate commerce upon suca lines as these would be unconstitutional and void, because 1t would be an attempt by the state to exercise the power to regu.ate commerce among the several States which 1s confided by the Constitution exclu. sively to Congress, (see State ireight tax cases, 15 Wallace, 232; Crandall vs. Nevada, 6 Wallace, 33; Gibbons vs. Ogden, 9 Wheaton, 1.) But, aside irom its unconstitutionality, such legislation would be ineffectual for other and very apparent reasons. Let us suppose that the commerce to be regulated extends over @ line irom Council Biuifs, lowa, to Boston, Mass., acd passing through the states of Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Connecticut and Massacnusetts. How can any rule or regulation jor carry- ing On commerce on this line be enacted or enforced by State authority? If we are to ad- mit that one rule may apply in one state and a different rule in another, a dozen different and conflicting rules might result. If some of tie States should pass no laws upon the subject what ig to hinder the railroad company from fixing its own rules and charging its own prices jor carrying ireight over the territory of suca State? Surely it will not be pretended vUhat a statute of Iowa can regulate the rights and duties of a common carrier in the State o1 Peunsyivania. Bat, again, the most conclusive of all considerations upon this subject is the fact that if the reguation of these tong nes belongs to the States aione they may increase as well as diminish the oharges of these carriers, aud may thus discriminate in lavor of their own people and against those of otner States, Again, if the laws of adozen ditferent States are io be ap- plied as regulations of the conduct of a carrier in the transportation of a single cargo such questions a8 these must arive:—Which State shali entorce its regulation ? To how many penalties shail the carrier be subjected? In what and how man courts shall he be answerable? and, finally, [¢ obedience to the jaws of one State 1s jound to be @ Violation of the laws of another, what shall be the carrier's duty? These suggestions, while they show the wisdom of our Jatners in placing this commerce under national control, also demon- strate the proposition that we have before laid down, that State control is simply impossipic. While this is wue there is @ ficld within which the State may and should Ye dno and that field is, a3 was well said by Cluei Justice Marshall, in the words already quoted in the enactment of such laws as apply to the “completely internal commerce of the State.’’ A contract to carry freight trom place to place within a State is clearly within the reach of State Jaws and as Clearly boyond the scope of federal legislation. Conflict between the State and the nation in the matter of the regulauon of commerce 18 clearly impossible, so Wisely and well have our fathers marked out the jurisdiction of Congress. Where the authority of the nation begins that of the State ends, The former reaches and con- trols Inter-State commerce, the latter tle: taternal commerce @ & State. and power of NEW YORK HERALD, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21, 1874.--TRIPLE SHEET. each within 118 appropriate spnere is ample. So far, mn, a8 the question expediency is concerned tt resolves itself into the Se whether inter-State railroad commerce all be regulated at all. Tae committee believe V a tw be, and.that, sooner or later, it must be, and believe sIso that every year’s delay on the part of Congress to inausurate the work out adds to the difficulties to be overcome, to the damages to be averted and to the evils to be remedied. It has been said that, admitting tae power to regwute commerce, it is not expedient to exercise it to the extent of limiting charges to such as are Teasonable, We have already considered the question as to the power to do and have seen that it ts clearly guiation, and, therefore, within the wer to regulate, and we here add, without hesi- ation, that we cousider it not pale the most just but the most expedient of al) possible regulations. Any uttempt to regulate this commerce which Stops short of @ prontbition of extortionate charges must prove altogether ineffectual ua @ remedy for existing evils. It is now Well settled, a8 we have seen, that the S:ates can put no limit OF these charges. Let it also be acknowledged aud settled that Congress cainot do so, and the evil which will result can be measured only by the selfishness, avarice and cupidify wiich can exist in & number o! great corporate’ monopolies com- bining tor their common interest and controiled by no law what RAPID TRANSIT. eerie pete What the West Side Association Suggest as a Solation of the Problem. To THE EDITOR OF THE HERALD:— The West Side Association have heretofore con- tributed in forming public opinion upon the neces- sity and means of accomplishing rapid transit on this island, It scems now tu be the important question to concentrate “public opinion on @ prac. ticable pian, Much 1s lost by difference of opinion, arising from incomplete and partial views; much will be gained by & comprehension of the neces sary condisions of this probiem and by uniting in @ plan in which these conditions are met. These conditions are threefold, viz. :— First—Legisiative authority. Second—Vhe plan and route, Third— ihe capital to construct, These conditions have been heretofore taken up in the order in which they are above stated—that is, the thing has proceeded in this way:—The Leg- islature has granted a charter to projectors, and has filled the charter witn restrictions and em- barrasswents, fhen a plau and route tave been adopted which have fated to meet the tests which engineers have applied, and capitalists have re- fused to put their imouey in it, phase coudilicns must now be metin reverse order, bugineers and contractors of experience, who have built and wio Know now to build rauroads, must determine upon # pian and route in conjunc- tion with men ot capital, aud it must be 4 plan and route which Men with money will approve, ‘Their approval will be wpen these g-ounds—that, considering the route and its coincidence with the natural lines of travel; ihe plan, wuether elevated or underground, and the cost of construction; the amount of travel they can calculate upou and the Tate ol tare, whe enterprise wili pay for tue lavest- ment not seven per cent simply—ior money here is worth more wien invested with skill and business energy and attention—but pay seven per ceat on a reasonable amount of bonds and two or turee times that on the capital stock above the bonds, Then such men, with suct a plan and route, suould go to the Legislature and yet a good charter on which they Cun build aioad, They would noteven start on a charter filled with clauses truit(ul of litt- gations, obstructions and damages. All the charters that have been granted and the failure of eaca to accomplish anytuing illustrate this position, The tuing must start with the capt- talist and the engineer or with suci a combina- tiun, ii John iay.or, Johnston aod sydney Villon should say what they would do, and then the Leg- islature give them leave to do it, it could be doute. Tuere are other men, but I name those wo are well known as an illustration. ‘rhere are several other points on which public opinion ought to be settied and united, and so Push solidly .or the result:— Firsi—Vhere suould not be @ single tine, but a system of rvads, coinciding wivi the lines oi travet and connecting with all points o} approach and departure und with the city centres. second—Au elevated road can be built at less cost than ap underground, it would not pay to build an underground road anywhere but on the line of tue greaest travel of the class who would Pay the highest fare—that 18, on broadway, Third—Thwough an elevated road wight tojure Broadway or tae Futh avenue it wouid not injure any Other or secondary avenue. ‘Tue concentra- tion and increase ot travel on any secondary aye- Due Would iu te end vastly overcome any incon- veniences or injuries, and largely increase the value Ol the property. High value Ou a main throughture depends on tbis concentration of travei throuzn 1 There 18 no secondary avenue on the island wuere the travel and value would not be doubied in ten years by an clevated road; the avenue setected On each side of the island will become the most valuable. Fourtn—It is not necessary to lay out a new street, or acquire arignt oi way thropgu private property, because there ure streets enough now; enough of the suriace is already given up tor streets, hese secondary streets would not ve in- jured but beneiited, and it would so greatly in- crease the cost of the roadasto dimiuish the profits and deter capital. No capitalist wil Javor 80 great an outlay for land for a new street rather than take an existing street. Futh—ine city ought to aid in butiding it by louning their money and credit, or by endcrsing the bonds of a private company, or, if this in- effectual, by building it asa public work. By in- dufereuce during the iast ten years, we have lost halt a million of population and $50,000,000 of tax- able property. They have been drawn away to the suburos. Lt we allow the half miilion of popuia- tion and $500,000,000 of taxable property which during the next ten years will gather around tis Metropolis to scttie in New Jersey and on Loag Island, and dive them from tuts ‘isiand, tue city willbe bankrupt, This is the policy of the Mayor and the Comptroller; but the evil is not without a remedy, Sixth—On the line of any proposed road the narrow views of property owuers, Wuether of Mr. Stewart on Broadway, of the residents on the Second ave- nue or the store keepers on the Sixth, must give Wuy; they must open their eyes to the real bene- fits, and be silent in view oi tie public good. 1 limit myseli to the statement of these gencral Principles, without discussiug them. We must comprehend the principies and the necessary con- ditions of the probiem, and then unite pubiic opinion in support of the men who will undertake any plan to accomplish the necessary result. Very Tespectiully, WILLIAM KR, MARLIN, President West Side Association, New York, Jan. 20, 1874. An Elevated Road Proposed=The Advan-= tages Claimed. To THE Epiror or THe HERALD: I would propose the building of an elevated Steam railway, starting from the Battery, tronting Whitehall street, running thence in a direct line to the centre of the block bounded by West and Washington streets, and continued through the middle of same paralicl or as nearly so as practica- ble to the Hudson or North River to the upper end of the island. A similar arrangement could be effected on tie east side. Built on iron columns fifty feet apart, at an eleva- tion of from fifteen to twenty feet, the advan- tages are as follows :— AD opportunity of rapid construction. Economy or space, convenience to your Jersey, Staten island and other ferries, and economy in cost of construction. You would only require a portion of two build- ings on each block and about ten feet off the rear end of each lot, and if built up at an elevation of twenty feet you need in reality only a resting place on same for your pillars or piers, thus giving an opportunity of utilizing any vacant space. H. C. WOMEN'S EDUCATIONAL SOOIETY, The Women’s Social Educational Society met yesterday afternoon, at three o’clock, in Plimpton Hall, Mrs. Caroline Soulé read a paper on “Peace.” The lady, in the course of a weil digested essay, took the ground that peace, and not immediately itself, but its principle, was not much advanced by any number 0i peace conventions in which sect resolusions were adopted m favor 01 peace, but which in the end amounted to little that was prac- tical, ‘Ihe true Way of securing peace in tiis world was to commence at the 1ountain-head—at home. 1t was by cultivating peace here, by guara- ing over and protecting the wile and the ones, that the beauty o1 peace could be secn, 1b Was such @ ‘test that would show ail the various advantages which were to be gained by it, Chad gael Ol peace should be particularly observed towards women, All that was rough should be excluded from them, In their faults they should be borne with, aud in the critical months all should be done to make their surroundings quiet and pleasant. In this way the gradual dissem- imation of peace would take place through woman's intiuence, and the principle which men have fought for, century after ccntury, and age after age, would be more firmly established by tnis inti- mate home influence than by all which men could do, Let women, then, do sometning to make their homes happy and peacetul, and when Dractically exemplified in this way men would begin to see that, alter all, there was something more beauti- ful than continual turmoil. The lecture was greeted with much applause by a small audience, SMALLPOX IN THE WESICHBSTER JAIL. Within the past few Qays several cases of small- Dox have occurred, chiefly among negroe Vicinity of White Plains, Westchester county, and yesterday it Is understood that one oi the prisoners In tue County Jail, at that place, Was attacked by the disease.” The patient was at once removed to the County Poor House, and prompt measures were taken by Sheriff Carpenter to thoroughiy disiniect the butiding. ‘There are at present some cighty Drigonerg confined in tue Jeu. young } PEASLEE OUT-PEASLEED. - Another Boston Swindle—The Community Dons Mut of Hundreds of Thousands by a New Game—How a Litile Shop Girl Upset It— The Manipulator Finally Prose- outed and His Game Removed {rom the “Hub” tothe “city of Brotherly Love.” Boston, Jan, 20, 1874, Few who have visited Boston during the last yeur or year and a hal could iat} to have noticed the extensive gambling which has been carried on here under the disguise of the prize candy trame. During the last few months particularly has the business flourished in all the principal streets, ana all Classes, Ages and sexes Of the community have Seemed tobe insane on the subject, tf one can judge irom the liberal patronage which has been bestowed upon the numerous establishments during their prolonged and sourishing existence, It 18 probabiy no exaggeration to say that HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS have been scooped tn from as many victims during the past year or two. ‘The pioneer and kiag of tie busiaess in Boston has been a wiry, Wisened chap named Filnt Peasice, who nas probably done more business than ail the others combined, and, until a few weeks, has successially defied ail the onicers and Courts in Boston or any other part of Christendom, His manner of operations has been to sell pipestem candy at five cents astick. Lach Suck was done up in paper, and inside of some ot them were checks entitling the foctunate buyer to whatever prize was named thercon, These prizes ranged from ten cents in currency up to alty cent and dollar silver pieces, and gold cons from $2 50 to $10, and very occasionally @ barrel of four oratonof coal, Ot course # very large propor- tion of the sticks sold contained no caecks what- ever, and these were reckoned as blanks, The very insignificance of the business was in. fact ite magnitude, For ative cent piece any one could try his Juck, and it was oiten tie case that THs IRRESISTIBLE INFLUENCE which attacues to all gambiing was apparent here, for many who would yoin only to try their tuck tour or five times would oiten try it as many hun- dred times, aud return again tor successive da: and @veninys and do the same ting, itis erdly necessary 10 add that all of these persistent ad- venturers were like so many tools aud their, Mouey, The “skinniest’” kind of a ‘skin’ game of faro was nowhere compared with the ‘skin- flint” game of Fi.nt Peasice. He had a spacious 100m on Tremont row, and aiterwards entarzed quarters on Washington street, A calcium light vy mizhtand an abundant display of tinsel und bunting by day, together with the incessant ring- ing of # gong, shrewd advertising ia the papers, with now und then the announcement ot an act of @ philanthropic or benevolent nature—all these, With tue chance, possible or impossible, of geting ® $10 gold piece tor a five cent nickel, attracted THOUSANDS OF VICTIMS DAILY, There was no class of the community but was represenied among the dupes, Merchants, clerki bankers and brokers, mechanics and laborers, an even beggars whose faces have been familiar on the streets for years, mingied in the general throng in playing THE NEW GAME OF PEASLER. Even women. some o! them weil dressed and ap- parently refiued, together with shop girls and elderly hags, whose appearance indicated but a very short Stay on tie mundane splere—uil these, with- out regard to color or race, mingied in the one common line of humanity anxious to try their luck at Peaslee, Even the city police got demoralized, and played tie game with sucn desperation that tue Chief had to issue an order ioruidding their participation in it under penalty oi removal from ofice, Kor months and montis (his order of ean ea continueg, and some days as many as 50,000 sticks were disposed of, {n 1act there was no limit to the demand. fhe physical gudurance of Peasiee or Mrs. Peasice to sell and the abtitty of the manufac. turer to supply the candy were the only question. ‘The entire resources of the largest coniecuoner in Boston were inadequate, and @ small army ol girls were hardly able ‘o wrap the sticas in papers fast enough to sunply the victimized buyers, During ali this hubous of excite ncnt in the “Hub” one of the girls in his employ conceived. and carried into efect a scheme Walch fairly OUT-PEASLEED PEASLEE, and resulted in her making a jew hundred dollare for herseli and some iriends. The sticks containing the checks for tie cash prizes—some 500 in num- ber—were in # pile by tuemseives. There was anotner pile of 5,000 or 6,000 wich contained no checks, aud oi course the purchasers ol these got the Same as olanxs in any ordinary lottery. It was the business o/ this girl to mix up a lew of the prize sticks wita a great many others which con- tained no prizes. One mourning, when the place was first opened for business, sne delivered to Mr. Peasiee, at his selling window, & batch of about 500 sticks. “Are they ali rigit?” asked the shrewd vendor. “Yes, sir,” answered the mnocent maiden, ana then the sale commenced, Peasiee was astonished to find that his first few customers invested in sums ranging trom $5 to $25 each, and, 48 none Of tiem seemed in a aurry to present cnecks ior payment, he naturaliy concludea that very ew had gone ont in the candy svia, and he was probably happy to the anticipation of a handsome morning’s profi. 1t was only a lew Mmomeuts beiore the wiole Datch oi 500 sticks which the girl had given hin as ‘properly mixed” were disposed of, and he called to ier for soma more. At about tiis time the demand for candy was not 80 brisk. On the contrary, those whom a moment before he could not supply fast enough now posiiively re- jused to induige further inthe little game of Peas- lee. This, Of course provoxed surprise, but it was novhing compared with his astonishment when the customers ofa tew minutes before now began to present @ multitude of cnecks for pav- ment amounting in the aggregate to nearly $1,000 in specie, and for which he had only received about $100 in currency. ‘he manner in which HE WENT FOR THAT LITCLE WORKING GIRL was neither siow nor digniied, “Why, you confounled pinay,” hé exclaimed, “every stick in that package you gave me con- tained checks for prizes.’ Calmiy looking around, and in a tone of aston- isument and regret, as if she had but just discov- ered her mistake, the young girl stammered : “Why, so they did, Mr. Peuslee.’” It is hardly necessary to add that the young lady's services were no longer required, but it is fair to presuine that her siiare of the profits result- ing such a stupid blunder was ample compensation for the loss o1 her situation, PEASLEE DRIVEN FROM THE CITY, Several indictments were finally returned against the vendor by the Grand Jury, and others engaged in the same business were also prosecuted for maintaining a lottery. Discovering that things were getting uncomfortably tropical an interview was had with District Attorney May, and he con- Sented to piace the cases on file if the business was permanently suspended. Discretion was the better part of valor, and the dealers unanimousiy agreed to suspend. Peasiee, though, is irrepressible and indomitable, and he has transferred his business from Boston to Philadeiphia, where he hopes the Jaw and public opinion are not so radical, It will not surprise the Hubonians if he manages in some way to ring his business into the iorthcoming Centenntat celebration for which the “City of Bro- therly Love” is now making such extensive prep- arations. COMMUNISTS ON TRIAL. The Tompkins Square Rioters in the Court of Special Sessions. There was a large attendance yesterday at the Court of Special Sessions—Judges Bixby, Kilbreth and Flammer presiding—expecting that the people called “Tompkins Square Rioters’? would be tried and disposed of. Mr. Theodore E. Tomlinson, who appeared for the last batch, was in court, and ad- dressed the Bench, saying that he was counsel for some twenty more, but that he understood from the Clerk that they were all to be sent to the Court of General Sessiens., Judge’ Flammer in- formed counsel that they would be called, and it they desired a trial by jury they would certainly be sent to General Sessions, ‘The case of Jacub HoeMicher was called, and on the advice of his counsel, Mr. Price, he consented to be tried betore the Court of Special Sessions, Sergeant Berchold, the chief witness against him, was unable to appear, and the case was accord- ingly postponed to Thursday, 22d tust. ‘rerence Donnelly, @ boy avout sixteen years of age, Was arraigned on a charge of riotous condact on the 18th oi January. Detectives Woolsey and Von Gerichten both swore that he was in the com- pany 0! riotous men and was heard to shout while an officer was taking a prisoner through Fourth street, “Take him away.’’ His counsel, Oscar Bogart, proved by several witnesses, arnong whom was his uncle, a Mr. Thomas McGuire, that Tereuce was a stranger in the city and a native and resi- dent of Pawtucket, R. 1, and had no means of knowing auything or anyvody connected with the disturbance on that day. Me was put on the stand Rimself, ee aetcat that he mingled in the crowd out o1 pure Curiosity, and all he said was, when ho saw the prisoner, who he did not Know, being clubbed, “Let him go.” “Let him go.’? The testimony in favor of Donnelly was very clear, and both his own and his uncle’s testimony as to hig short residence in the city was positive. Judges Kilbrech and Fiammer, however, plied the witnesses with all sorts ot questions looking to- wards a conviction. Judge Jag tS however, Hy nounced the man Donnelly not gullty At once, and wouid not recede irom his decision. Jucges Kil- breth and Kammer were determined to make @ case, though, and found the prisoner gaits, but suspended sentence, and poor Terence Vonnelly, @ country lad from Pawtucaet, R, 1, walked ant of | Vag COULE nEvEs Fo returms