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. 



5 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, 611, 614, 616, 618, 628, 656, 657, 659, 665; Senate 



