RAILWAY LEGISLATION 22$ 



trated by its action upon the railroad question in the first session 

 of the Forty-third Congress (1873-74). Some nine different 

 bills and one joint resolution embodying various propositions 

 for the regulation of railroads were introduced at this session, 1 

 and the subject finally came before the House in the form of a 

 bill " to regulate commerce among the several states," 2 reported 

 by Mr. McCrary of Iowa, chairman of the committee on rail- 

 roads and canals. 3 This measure proposed to prohibit extortion 

 and unfair discrimination by railroads engaged in interstate 

 commerce, and in order to determine what were reasonable 

 rates, a commission of nine was to be established to make sched- 

 ules of maximum rates for each railroad. Anyone aggrieved 

 by higher charges, might bring suit against the railroad company 

 in the courts and in such suits the commissioners* schedules 

 were to be taken as prima facie evidence of reasonableness, 

 but the corporations were to be permitted to prove the rea- 

 sonableness of the charges if they could do so. No method 

 was provided, as in the Illinois law of 1873, for prima facie 

 evidence as to unjust discrimination, 4 but in other respects 

 the two measures were similar in principle. 



This McCrary bill was introduced in the House on January 20, 

 1874; but before it came up for consideration a resolution was 

 adopted by a vote of 172 to 64 declaring that Congress possessed 

 the constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce and 

 that existing conditions demanded the prompt exercise of that 

 power. 5 The debate on the McCrary bill was very extensive 

 and involved various questions of constitutionality, state 

 rights, and expediency. 6 Some of the representatives were in 



1 House Journal, index, p. 1543. 



2 The bill is printed in full in Congressional Record, 1946. 



3 McCrary had introduced one of the railroad bills in the previous Congress. 

 He was a lawyer and later became consulting attorney for the Atchison, Topeka 

 and Santa Fe Railroad Company. Biographical Congressional Directory, 667. 



4 The section prohibiting unjust discrimination seems to have been tacked on 

 to the bill. It is clear that the interest at this time was in " cheap transportation " 

 rather than in the prevention of discrimination. 



6 House Journal, 408-410. 



6 For the course of the McCrary bill in Congress, see House Journal, 272, 362, 

 520, 552, 556, 575, 595, 598, 610, 6n, 614, 616, 618, 628, 656, 657, 659, 665; Senate 



