Графични страници
PDF файл

has required railroads to equip their cars with automatic couplers and brakes, imposing an absolute duty and liability in that regard. It has required locomotives to be equipped with ashpans which can be emptied or cleaned without the necessity of an employe going under the locomotive. See Appendix.

Congress has also legislated in regard to the liability of interstate railroads to their employes. The first act, approved June, 11, 1906, having been adjudged invalid, in that it did not limit the recovery to employes engaged in interstate commerce,' another act was passed in 1908 to cure this defect.2 An act has also been passed limiting the hours of service of trainmen, and telephone and telegraph operators in interstate service, and congress has also (1911) ordered an investigation by a commission of the question of substituting the rule of compensation in place of a liability for negligence where employes are injured in interstate railroad service.

Congress has also required railroads engaged in interstate commerce to make full reports of all accidents to the Interstate Commerce Commission. This requirement is not limited to accidents on trains engaged in interstate commerce, but includes all accidents on the railroads engaged in interstate commerce; and a railroad is so engaged within the regulating power of congress when it makes shipments by through routing in interstate commerce. This act has not been construed.

Recent legislation by congress in the regulation of interstate commerce includes the prohibition of interstate carriage of obscene literature," of game killed in violation of state laws,"

subject of the increasing number of railroad accidents and strongly recommends legislation by congress requiring the adoption of the block system and the block signal.

1 See Howard v. Ill. Cent. R. R. Co., 207 U. S. 463, 52 L. Ed. 297 (1907), Justices Moody, Harlan, and Holmes dissenting. Three of the justices, Peckham, Fuller, and Brewer, did not concur in holding that congress had power to legis late on the subject of the relation

between master and servant in the railroad service.

2 See Act of April 22, 1908, U. S. Compiled Stat. 1901, 1909 Supp. p. 1171, and Act of April 5, 1910, See infra, § 527 et seq.

See infra, p.


4 Act of March 3, 1901, infra. Act of February 8, 1897, 3 § 540.

Act of May 25, 1900, 3 Comp. Comp. Stat. 3180 § 181.

condemned carcasses of animals,1 lottery tickets,2 dairy products falsely labeled or branded as to the state or territory in which produced, and also what is known as the White Slave Act, the transfer of women for immoral purposes from state to state.

Congress has also empowered the secretary of agriculture to establish rules concerning exportation and transportation of live stock and issue certificate of freedom from disease, and providing for admission of cattle so certified into any state without further inspection or fees."

The police power of the state was extended to oleomargarine, butterine, etc., as it had theretofore been extended to liquors in the "original package.”

As to the anti-trust legislation of congress and also legislation in relation to the relations of labor and capital in interstate commerce, see chapter V, infra, "Business Combinations in Interstate Commerce" and chapter VI "Labor Combinations. in Interstate Commerce."

Congress has also legislated extensively in regard to transportation by water in the navigation acts. The Interstate Commerce Act only regulates water transportation, when the transportation is partly by railroad and partly by water under a common control or management.


In 1906 important statutes were enacted, to-wit the Meat Inspection Act the Food and Drugs Act and the National Quarantine Laws, all illustrating the trend for the enlargement of federal power through its extension to classes of subjects, wherein the states have hitherto exercised concurrent jurisdiction during the non-action of congress. Of these the most important is the Food and Drugs Act, commonly known as the Pure Food Act, approved June 30th, 1906. This act makes it un

1 Act of May 2, 1895, 3 Comp. Stat. 3192.

2 Sec. 6, supra. Act of March 3, 1895, 3 Comp. Stat. 3178.

8 Act of July 1, 1902, Supp. Comp. Stat., p. 1182.

4 Act of June 25, 1910. See supra, sec. 7.

5 Act of February 2, 1903, Supp. Comp. Stat., p. 1183.

Act of May 9, 1902, Supp.. Comp. Stat. p. 369.

7 Act of June 30, 1906, Supp. Comp. Stat. 1106.

8 Act of June 30, 1906, Supp. Comp. Stat. 1106.

9 Act of June 19, 1906, Supp. Comp. Stat. 1244.

lawful to manufacture within any territory or the District of Columbia or to introduce into any state or territory or District of Columbia from any other state or territory or District of Columbia or from any foreign country or to ship to any foreign country, any article of food or drugs which is adulterated or misbranded, within the meaning of the act.

§ 59 (55). The department of commerce and labor.-In 1903 congress established the department of commerce and labor, the secretary at the head being made one of the executive officers of the government and as such one of the president's advisers known as the cabinet.1

This department included several of the bureaus theretofore included in other departments, and among others the Department of Labor, which had been established by congress in 1888.2

Section 5 of this act establishes a Bureau of Manufactures, and section 6 a Bureau of Corporations, which is vested with the same power and authority of investigation in respect to corporations and combinations engaged in interstate commerce as is conferred on the Interstate Commerce Commission in respect to railroads. The commissioner of corporations is given powers of investigation, with the right to summon witnesses and call for the production of books and papers, subject to the same immunities against the enforcement of self-incriminating testimony, as is contained in the act of 1893 concerning the Interstate Commerce Act.3

This act includes in section 6, as subject to the investigation of the commissioner of corporations, corporations engaged in insurance. It has been adjudged, supra, § 8, in successive opinions of the supreme court, that insurance is not commerce in any of its forms.^

This act has not been judicially construed. The federal

1 Act of February 14, 1903, Supp. Comp. Stats., p. 87, infra § 494.

2 Infra, § 495 et seq.

3 Interstate Commerce Commission v. Brimson, 154 U. S. 447, 38 L. Ed. 1047 (1894); Interstate Commerce Commission v. Baird,

194 U. S. 25, 48 L. Ed. 860 (193); infra, § 351.

The Commissioner of Corpora ions in his first annual report, De cember 1904, says that if this pur pose is irrevocably settled, the powers of the commissioner rls tive thereto are of purely a staty

government has obviously no visitorial power over corporations which it does not create, and the power of the commissioner to make investigations or to compel reports would be clearly limited to transactions in interstate commerce, to the same extent as the powers of the interstate commerce commission are limited to transactions in interstate as distinguished from domestic commerce.

While the powers of the Bureau of Corporations are de scribed mainly by reference to those contained in the Interstate Commerce Act, the latter is a quasi-judicial body, in the sense that it is empowered to hear complaints and make charges and findings for judicial investigation and determination, while the commissioner of corporations is at the head of an administrative department of the government. The powers of investigation vested in this bureau are to be used for the purpose of assisting the legislative department in making laws, and the executive department in enforcing them. The commissioner has no judicial powers, and within the scope of his duties must appeal to the courts for the enforcement of his orders. The statute has not been judicially construed, nor

tical, voluntary, non-compulsory nature. He suggests however, that in view of the rapid development of the insurance business, its extent, the enormous amount of money and the diversity of interests involved and the present business methods, that under existing conditions, insurance is commerce and may be subject to federal regulation through affirmative action by congress.

It is difficult to see, however, if the supreme court adheres to its present rulings, how the jurisdiction of congress can be enlarged by its own declarations of the extent of its powers.

1 It is said in th every exhaustive first annual report of the commissioner, Hon. James R. Garfield, "that many of the specific powers of the Interstate Commerce Com.

mission are clearly inapplicable to the purpose of the Bureau of Corporations. He cannot make inves tigations or procure and enforce information by means of his com pulsory powers for the purpose of enforcing the penal provisions other than those contained in the organic act of the bureau, nor can he furnish information so procured to private individuals for their personal use. His compulsory investigatory powers are further limited by the rights of privacy of the citizen which may not be invaded by inquiry except for a definite, constitutional and legal object, and only such matters may be investigated as relate to and give information upon the objects of the bureau and its work."

has any appeal been made to the courts to enforce its powers of investigation by compulsory testimony or production of books.1

1 Commissioner Garfield says in his report of December, 1904, "In brief, the policy of the bureau in the accomplishment of the purposes of its creation is to co-oper ate, and not antagonise, the business world. The immediate object of its inquiries is the suggestion of constructive legislation, not the institution of criminal legislation. It proposes through exhaustive investigations of law and fact to secure conservative action, to avoid ill considered attack upon corporations which will avoid unfair and

dishonest practices. Legitmate business law respecting persons and corporations have nothing to fear from the proposed exercise of this governmental power of inquiry." It was held in U. S. v. Armour, 142 Fed. 808 (N. D. of Ill.) 1906, that the immunity under act of congress extended to an individual who gave self-incriminating statements to the commissioner of corporations in an investigation under this section. See infra, section 12 of Act. See also Act of June 13, 1906.

« ПредишнаНапред »