[18] What powers are legislative.

Schedule-making power of carriers not legislative,- see post, § 28, note [3.]

Granting of franchises a legislative function, see post, § 53, note [13].

The Federal Safety Appliance Law, § 5, authorized the American Railway Association to designate to the Interstate Commerce Commission the standard height of draw bars for freight cars and provided that upon such designation by the Association, the Commission should give notice to all common carriers of the standard so fixed.- Held, that this section was not invalid as delegating legislative power to the Association or the Commission.- St. Louis & I. M. R. Co. v. Taylor, 210 U. S. 281, 28 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 616.

The powers conferred on the Interstate Commerce Commission as to uniformity of rates are administrative.- Texas & P. R. Co. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co., 204 U. S. 426, 27 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 350, revg. s. c. 12 Tex. Ct. R. 498, 85 S. W. 1052.

By a general statute Congress declared in effect that navigation in rivers should be freed from unreasonable obstructions arising from bridges of insufficient height, width of span, etc. It imposed on the Secretary of War the duty of ascertaining what particular cases come within the rule prescribed by Congress, as well as the duty of enforcing the rule in such cases.- Held, that this was not a delegation of legislative power.- Union Bridge Co. v. U. S., 204 U. S. 364, 27 Sup. Ct. R. (T. S.) 367.

Where a statute declares the general rules and principles, provides the methods of procedure and acts upon the subject as far as possible, and leaves to executive officers the duty of applying the rules and principles and bringing about the results pointed out, it is not unconstitutional as vesting executive officers with legislative functions.- Buttfield v. Stranahan, 192 U. S. 470, 24 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 349; Field v. Clark, 143 C. S. 649, 12 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 495.

The power to prescribe a tariff of rates for carriage by a common carrier is a legislative and not administrative or judicial function.Interst. Com. Commission v. C. N. O. & T. P. R. Co., 167 U. S. 479, 17 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 896.

Authorizing common carriers to establish rates which, when published and filed, shall be the lawful rates, does not confer legislative power on the carrier.-U. S. v. Standard Oil Co., 155 Fed. 305.

The power is legislative which defines rights, permits things to be done, or prohibits the doing thereof.-U. S. v. Matthews, 146 Fed. 306. An act making it a criminal offense to violate any rule or regulation made by the Secretary of the Interior for the protection of the forest preserves, is void, as an attempted delegation of legislative power. The

legislature may authorize other officers to make rules and regulations for carrying its laws into effect, but it cannot leave a statute to be enlarged upon or defined by an administrative or judicial officer.- U. S. v. Matthews, 146 Fed. 306.

The giving of a franchise, consents, etc., and the performing of such acts as the state has declared to be necessary in order to create a franchise, are legislative powers and functions.- Ghee v. Northern Union Gas Co., 158 N. Y. 510, 53 N. E. 692.

street road

*

*

*

*

*

* *

An Act provided, among other things, that "at a point where a * * or traveled way is crossed at the same level by a railthe Supreme Court or County Court may, upon the application of the local authorities and upon ten days' notice to the railroad corporation whose road so crosses, order that gates shall be erected across such streets,” etc.— Held, that the Act was not invalid as delegating legislative powers to the courts, as no legislative power is given to the courts, but the statute makes the erection and operation of gates dependent upon the necessity of them for safe travel, such necessity to be determined by the courts.- People v. L. I. R. R. Co., 134 N. Y. 506, 31 N. E. 873.

Authorizing the N. Y. Board of Railroad Commissioners to grant a certificate that no public interests require an extension of railroad provided for in a corporate charter, and making such certificate a bar to any attempt to annul the charter of such railroad for failure to make such extension, delegated no legislative power to such Board.- People v. Ulster & D. R. Co., 128 N. Y. 240, 28 N. E. 635.

Giving the commissioners under the Rapid Transit Act of 1875 power to determine on the necessity of railways, fix routes, prescribe the plan of their construction and operation, etc., confers no legislative power upon the commissioners, who simply perform administrative acts in carrying the law into effect and applying it.—Matter of N. Y. El. R. Co., 70 N. Y. 327, 3 Abb. N. C. (N. Y.) 401, affg. s. c. 7 Hun (N. Y.), 239.

The fixing of rates for public service corporations is a legislative function.- Brooklyn Union Gas Co. v. New York, 115 App. Div. (N. Y.) 69, 100 N. Y. Supp. 625, affd. 188 N. Y. 334, 81 N. E. 141.

The power to establish a tariff of rates is a legislative function.— Village of Saratoga Springs v. Saratoga Gas, E. L. & P. Co., 122 App. Div. (N. Y.) 203, 107 N. Y. Supp. 341, revd. on other points, 191 N. Y. 123, 83 N. E. 693. Steenerson v. Gt. Northern R. Co., 69 Minn. 353, 72 N. W. 713.

An act granting power to a commissioner to be exercised on conditions and in the general manner prescribed by the legislature, is not a delegation of legislative power.- Grant v. Courter, 24 Barb. (N. Y.) 232.

An act of the legislature provided that the electors of the state, at the next annual election, should determine whether such act should or should not become a law.- Held, that the act was not unconstitutional as an attempt to delegate legislative power to the people.- Johnson v. Rich, 9 Barb. (N. Y.) 680.

Vesting the state railroad commission with power to fix reasonable rates is not unconstitutional as a delegation of legislative or judicial power.- Storrs v. Pensacola & A. R. Co., 29 Fla. 617, 11 So. 226.

Giving a state railroad commission power to fix rates is not a delegation of legislative power.- Railroad Comrs. v. Pensacola & A. R. Co., 24 Fla. 417, 5 So. 129, 2 L. R. A. 504.

The powers vested in the Georgia railroad commissioners are not legislative. The difference between the power to pass a law and the power to adopt rules and regulations to carry into effect a law already passed, is apparent.- Georgia R. & B. Co. v. Smith, 70 Ga. 694, affd. 128 U. S. 174, 9 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 47.

Giving the inspector of factories the discretion as to the number, location, construction, etc., of fire escapes on buildings, does not render the Illinois Act of 1897 unconstitutional, as delegating legislative power to an administrative officer.—Arms v. Ayer, 192 Ill. 601, 61 N. E. 851, 58 L. R. A. 277.

A statute of Illinois authorizing a commission to fix a schedule of maximum rates for all railroads within the state is not unconstitutional as an attempted delegation of legislative power.- Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Jones, 149 Ill. 361, 37 N. E. 247, 24 L. R. A. 141.

A statute which provides that railroads shall issue mileage books, but permits the railroad commission to excuse any railroad from issuing such books where public welfare or the financial condition of the road justifies, is not unconstitutional on the ground that it contains a delegation of legislative power to the railroad commission.- Attorney Gen. v. Old Colony R. Co., 160 Mass. 62, 35 N. E. 252, 22 L. R. A. 112.

A statute requiring a carrier to build a station-house may require such structure to be "commodious" in the opinion of commissioners appointed by the court.-Commonwealth v. Eastern R. Co., 103 Mass. 254.

A statute authorizing a commission, in its discretion, to permit a railway corporation to increase its capital stock, is void as a delegation of legislative power.- State v. Gt. Northern R. Co., 100 Minn. 445, 111 N. W. 289.

An act empowering the state insurance commissioner to determine what provisions of insurance contracts are lawful and which are not, is unconstitutional, as delegating legislative power.- Anderson v. Assurance Co., 59 Minn. 182, 60 N. W. 1095, 63 N. W. 241, 28 L. R. A. 609.

The grant by a legislature of authority to a commission to fix and determine rates is not objectionable as a delegation of legislative power, as the commission is administrative merely.— State v. Ch. M. & St. P. R. Co., 38 Minn. 281; revd. on other grounds, 134 U. S. 418, 10 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 462, 702.

An act authorizing the Railroad and Warehouse Commission to find and determine whether the tariffs of rates, classifications, etc., are just and reasonable, and if not, to compel the carrier to make them so, does not delegate legislative power.- State v. Ch. M. & St. P. R. Co., 38 Minn. 281, 37 N. W. 282; revd. on other grounds, 134 U. S. 418, 10 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 462, 702.

Giving a state railroad commission power to determine what are equal and reasonable rates is not a delegation of legislative power.- State v. Ch. M. & St. P. R. Co., 38 Minn. 281, 37 N. W. 782; revd. 134 U. S. 418.

A statute giving to the Board of Agriculture of North Carolina power to regulate the transportation of cattle is not invalid as an unlawful delegation of legislative power.- State v. So. R. Co., 141 N. C. 846; 54 S. E. 294.

The power to fix rates is a legislative function which the courts cannot exercise. Griffin v. Water Co., 122 N. C. 206, 30 S. E. 319, 41 L. R. A. 240.

66

The act of the North Carolina legislature creating a state railroad commission, denouncing excessive charges, unjust discriminations, etc., as unlawful, and authorizing the commission to make such just and reasonable rules and regulations as may be necessary for preventing the same," does not confer on that body anything of legislative power.- Atlantic Exp. Co. v. Wilmington & W. R. Co., 111 N. C. 463, 16 S. E. 393, 18 L. R. A. 393n.

The power to determine how much money shall be spent for public buildings, is purely legislative and cannot be delegated.-State v. Budge, 14 N. Dak. 532, 105 N. W. 724.

[19] What powers are judicial.

Power to punish for contempt a judicial function,- see post, § 19, note [8].

By a general statute Congress declared in effect that navigation in rivers should be freed from unreasonable obstructions arising from bridges of insufficient height, width of span, etc. It imposed on the Secretary of War the duty of ascertaining what particular cases come within the rule prescribed by Congress, as well as the duty of enforcing the rule in such cases.- - Held, that this was not a delegation of judicial

power.-Union Bridge Co. v. U. S., 204 U. S. 364, 27 Sup. Ct. R. (U. S.) 367.

Whether or not a given rate is reasonable and just, or whether it is unjustly discriminatory or prejudicial, are clearly judicial questions.Jewett v. Ch. M. & St. P. R. Co., 156 Fed. 160.

In consenting, under N. Y. R. R. L., § 34, to the discontinuance of a station, the N. Y. Board of Railroad Commissioners acted judicially. The action of the board clearly was not legislative, for it was not in the nature of making a law, but of determining a controversy. It was not ministerial, because the commissioners were not required by law to do a specified act in a specified way upon a given state of facts without regard to their own judgment as to the propriety of the act, and with no power to exercise discretion. It was, however, judicial, because the law impliedly required them to decide upon a question of fact and to exercise their judgment upon evidence in determining whether the consent should be given or not.-People ex rel. Loughran v. Board of R. R. Comrs., 158 N. Y. 421, 53 N. E. 163, affg. s. c. 32 App. Div. (N. Y.) 158, 52 N. Y. Supp. 901.

When the law requires a public officer to do a specified act, in a specified way, upon a conceded state of facts, without regard to his own judgment as to the propriety of the act and with no power to exercise discretion, the duty is regarded as ministerial in character. When, however, the law requires a judicial determination to be made, such as the decision of a question of fact or the exercise of judgment in deciding whether the act should be done or not, the duty is regarded as judicial. - People ex rel. Harris v. Comrs., 149 N. Y. 26, 43 N. E. 418.

Authorizing the New York Board of Railroad Commissioners to grant a certificate that no public interests require an extension of a railroad provided for in a corporate charter, and making such certificate a bar to any attempt to annul the charter of such railroad for failure to make such extension, conferred no judicial functions upon such board.People v. Ulster & D. R. Co., 128 N. Y. 240, 28 N. E. 635.

Decisions of the Commissioners of the Land Office upon questions of fact are judicial.- People ex rel. Burnham v. Jones, 112 N. Y. 597, 20 N. E. 577.

Where a subordinate body is vested with power to determine a question of fact, the duty is judicial.- People ex rel. Francis v. Common Council, 78 N. Y. 33, revg. s. c. 18 Hun (N. Y.), 20.

That a public officer or board exercises judgment and discretion in the discharge of his duties, does not make his actions or powers judicial in their nature.- People ex rel. Corwin v. Walter, 68 N. Y. 403.

The powers conferred upon the Board of Commissioners of the Metropolitan Sanitary District of New York are not judicial, but administra