320
The Green Bag
sion of the Supreme Court] expressly held that stock ownership by a railroad
Direct Government. Initiative and Referendum Unconstitutional. Texas.
company in a bona fide corporation, irrespective of the extent of such owner ship, did not preclude a railroad company from transporting the commodities man ufactured, mined, produced or owned by
mously decided March 9 that the initia tive and referendum are unconstitutional.
such corporation, nothing in that con clusion foreclosed the right of the government to question the power of a railroad company to transport in inter state commerce a commodity manufac tured, mined, owned or produced by a corporation in which the railroad held
The Texas Court of Appeals unani
The case arose upon the violation of an ordinance regulating telephone rates in Dallas. The charter of Dallas both gives
the usual oflicials the usual powers to regulate public facilities, and adds that when such regulations are adopted by
the method of the initiative and refer endum they cannot be altered except
stock, and where the power of the rail
by a similar submission to the popular vote. The defendant violated such an
road company as a stockholder was used to obliterate all distinctions between the two corporations. That is to say, where
ordinance, and its validity was essential to the punishment of the telephone ofli
as to so commingle the affairs of both
cial who disregarded its terms. The Court said: — "Under our Constitution the prin
as by necessary effect to make such
ciple of making laws is that the laws
affairs practically indistinguishable, and therefore to cause both corporations to
are made by the people, not directly, but by and through their chosen repre sentatives. By the act under considera
the power was exerted in such a manner
be one for all purposes. . . . "Our duty is to enforce the statute,
tion this principle is subverted, and the
and not to exclude from its prohibitions things which are properly embraced within them. Coming to discharge this duty it follows, in view of the express prohibitions of the commodities clause, it must be held that while the right of a railroad company as a stockholder to use its stock ownership for the purpose
law is proposed to be made at the last by the vote of the people, leading inevi tably to what was intended to be avoided —confusion and great popular excite
ment in the enactment of the laws." Employers’ Liability.
Waiver of
Remedies at Law by Contract of Accident
Insurance 0r Benefit—Freedom of Con of a bona fide separate administration
of the affairs of a corporation in which it has a stock interest may not be denied, the use of such stock ownership in
substance for the purpose of destroying the entity of a producing, etc., corpora tion, and of commingling its aflairs in administration with the affairs of the railroad company, soasto make the two corporations virtually one, brings the rail road company so voluntarily acting as to such producing, etc., corporation within the prohibitions of the commodi ties clause."
tract may be Limited by Legislation De
priving such Contracts of Force —Legis lative Powers. U. S. An important point of employers' lia bility and workmen’s compensation legis lation was disposed of in Chicago, Bur lington é'Quincy R. R. Co. v. McGuire,
219 U. S. 549, decided by the United States Supreme Court Feb. 20. The question arose under section 2071 of the Iowa code, as amended in 1898, which
in substance provides that no contract restricting the liability of the employer
