Peter."®  He  considered  the  claims  of  the  special  charter  rail-
roads, if  upheld,  a  standing  menace  to  the  state.  He  proposed
two  remedies.  First,  the  state's  right  of  eminent  domain  might
be  applied  to  the  railroads  in  such  a  way  that  the  state  on
payment  of  just  compensation  could  acquire  the  right  to  pre-
scribe rates.  The  measure  of  such  compensation  could  not  be
what  abuse  and  extortion  on  the  part  of  the  companies  would
yield  if  permitted  to  continue  forever,  but  would  have  a  more
reasonable  standard."^  Second,  he  recommended  a  constitu-
tional amendment  prescribing  that  when  any  statute  is  enacted
in  favor  of  or  for  the  benefit  of  a  company  at  its  instance,  the
company  should  by  the  mere  force  of  the  beneficial  enactment
be  subject  to  such  duties  and  control  by  the  state  as  the  amend-
ment might  propose.  Since  railroad  companies  were  frequently
in  need  of  such  favorable  and  enabling  legislation,  he  believed
such  a  policy  would  soon  annihilate  the  claims  of  the  special
charter  companies  to  self-regulation.^®"^  The  new  constitution
of  Pennsylvania,  adopted  in  1873,  contained  such  a  provi-
sion.^®^ As  we  have  seen  the  retiring  governor  recommended
a  similar  plan,  but  not  so  fully  developed.
The  railroad  commissioner,  in  his  annual  report,  complained
that  his  powers  were  too  limited  to  remedy  the  railroad  abuses.
He  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  he  could  not  commence
suits  against  railroad  companies  and  had  no  power  to  prevent
extortions,  his  duties  being  mainly  limited  by  the  law  to  the
collection  of  facts  and  statistics  for  the  information  of  the  leg-
islature.°®-    He  made  no  recommendations  in  this  regard,  but


577.  Ibid.,  pp.  13-14.
578.  Ibid.,  Inaugural  Address,  p.  12.
579.  Ibid.,  p.   13.
580.  Ibid.,  pp.  13-14.
