~ 
1900. | HASTINGS—POLICE POWER OF THE STATE. _— 400 
thinks the constitution leaves the qualification of electors to 
the states; that Congress had never attempted to act in the mat- 
ter and the states had. He concludes that suffrage was not be- 
stowed on women by the fourteenth amendment, and adopting 
the reasoning of Judge Miller in the Slaughter-house cases, from 
which he at the time dissented, he observes: 
“The amendment did not add to the privileges and immunities of the 
citizen ; it simply furnished an additional guarantee for such as he 
already had.” 
The fourteenth amendment had even before this been sought to 
be used in the case of * Bradwell ws. The State to confer on a 
woman the right to practice law in defiance of the state statute of 
Illinois. 
In this year of 1874 came also the case of ? Railroad Company 
vs. Maryland. In granting the franchise for constructing the 
branch of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad from Baltimore to Wash- 
ington the legislature authorized it to charge not more than $2.50 
for passage the whole way, and shorter distances in proportion, 
with a requirement that one-fifth of the amount received for pas- 
senger fares should be paid to the state. This was claimed by the 
representatives of the road to be a tax on interstate travel. Prob- 
ably the contention was not wholly in the interest of the traveler, 
and so the court viewed it. 
Judge Bradley passing upon the case says : 
““When the constitution was adopted transportation by land was wholly 
performed on common roads and in vehicles drawn by animal power. 
No one imagined at that day that the roads and bridges of the country, 
except when the latter crossed navigable streams, were not entirely sub- 
ject to state regulation and control. They were all made either by the 
states or under their authority. The power of the state to impose or au- 
thorize such tolls as it saw fit was unquestioned. No one then supposed 
that the wagons of the country which were the vehicles of its commerce 
were subject to national regulation.” 
‘“‘The movements of persons and merchandise, so long as it was as 
free to one person as to another, to the citizens of other states as to the 
citizens of the state in which it was performed was not regarded as un- 
constitutionally restricted and trammeled by tolls exacted on bridges or 
turnpikes, whether belonging to the states or private persons ; and when 
in process of time canals were constructed, no amount of tolls which were 
1 16 Wall, 130. 221 Wall, 470 
