Page:United States Reports, Volume 209.djvu/191

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

Ex /mete YOUNG. 16? 209 U.S.' Op/nion of the Court. dictment or other criminal proceedings for a violation of the act, would therefore furnish no reasonable or adequate oppor- tunity for the presentation of a defense founded. upon the assertion that the rates were too low and therefore the act in- valid. We do not say the company could not interpose this defense 'in an action to recover penalties or upon the trial of an indict- ment (St. /?u/? &�. Ry. Co. v. G///, 156 U.S. 649), but the facility of proving it in either case falls so far below that which would obtain in a court of equity that comparison is scarcely possible. To await proceedings against the eompauy in a state court grounded upon a disobedience of the act, and then, if necessary, obtain a review in this court by writ of error to the highest state court, would place the company in peril of large loss and its agents in great risk of fines and imprisonment if it should be finally determined that the act was valid. This risk the company ought not to be required to take. Over eleven. thousand millions of dollam, it is estimated, are invested in railroad property, owned by many thousands of people who are scattered over the whole country from ocean to ?cean, and they are entitled to equal protection from the laws and from the courts, with the owners of all other kinds of property, no more, no less. The courts having jurisdiction, 'Federal or state, should at all times be open to them as well as to others, for the purpose of protecting their property and their legal All the objections to a remedy at law as being plainly.in- adequate are obviated b? a suit in equity, making all. who are directly interested parties to the suit, and. enjoinlng the enforcement of the act until the decision of the court upon the 1e?' question. An act of the-legislature'luring rates, either for passengers or freight, is to be regarded as pr/ma lac/e valid, and the onus rests upon the company to prove. its assertion to the contrary. Under such circumstan?ce it was stared by Mr, Justice M'dler,