Munn+v.+Illinois

= Munn v. Illinois =

**__ Case title: __** Munn v. State of Illinois January 14th - 18th, 1877 Chief Justice Morrison Remick Waite was born on November 29th 1816 in Lyme Connecticut and he died on March 23rd 1888 in Washington D.C. He went to school at Yale beginning in 1809 and graduated with high honors. He taught for a short period of time and then began to study law. In 1812 Judge Waite opened an office for a short time at Middletown,and then returned back to his original town and committed himself there. He married Maria Selden in 1816. Waite represented Lyme in the General Assembly in 1815 and 1826. In 1830-1831 he was a member of the senate. After Judge Daggett retired in 1834, Judge Waite got elected to be a Supreme Court Judge. In 1854 he was promoted to Chief Justice which he was for 22 years when he retired in 1857 because he reached the age of seventy. People described him as kind, said he had confidence but he was also modest, and many of his younger coworkers dubbed him as very helpful and a guide. **Are you sure you have the right guy? B/c if he was CJ for 22 years (from 1854) that would make it 1876 when he retired. Plus, you say that he retired in 1857 (which would make him 41 - the picture looks older than a 41 yr old guy).**
 * __Date of hearing:__ **
 * __Chief justice and brief biographical sketch:__ **



14th amendment. - **what part of the 14th Amendment?**
 * __Documents or amendments to the Constitution relevant to this case:__ **

==== The case developed as a result of the Illinois legislature’s responding in 1871 to pressure from the National Grange, an association of farmers, by setting maximum rates that  private companies could charge for the storage and transport of agricultural products.====
 * __Summary of the case/Analysis in your own words:__ **

This case had to deal with Grangers and their storage and transportation of grains and other agricultural products. Illinois had a law that had maximum prices that grain elevators could charge. The Grangers complained that railroads and storage places weren’t capping these rates, which was unfair because at the time there was only one way to transfer crops and no other way to store them. The railroads, opposing the Grangers, took it all the way to the Supreme Court to get it appealed, however; the Chicago grain warehouse firm of Munn and Scott was subsequently found guilty of violating the law but appealed the conviction on the grounds that the Illinois  regulation represented an unconstitutional deprivation of property without  due process of law. They failed and Railroads were shafted.



A Chicago warehouse firm had been accussed guilty by the Illinois state court by violating their laws. **He?** was said to have provided for the fixing of the maximum charge for storage of grain he appealed saying that the fixing of the maximum rates consisted a taking of property without due process of law.
 * __Main issue argument of the case:__ **

Th decision rendered by the court and the vote: The court overturned this case in 1879 allowing states to regulate railroads to do bussiness the case was decided 7 to 2.

**Who??** Spoke for the majority when he said that state power to regulate extends to private industries that affect the public interest. Because grain storage facilities were devoted to public use, their rates were subject to public regulation. Moreover, Waite declared that even though Congress alone is granted control over  interstate commerce, a state could take action in the public interest without impairing that federal control.
 * __Who voted what, dissenting, and why:__ **

Most of the people voted to regulate the rates of railroad owned grain elevators, declaring that business interests (private property) used for public good be regulated by government. Stephen Field and William Strong were dissenting because **______________???**

- Chief Justice Morrison Remick Waite : 10 years of being on the court and three years as chief justice. **(this doesn't match up with what you have written above under the CJ section).** -Nathan Clifford: 20 years -Noah Swayne: 15 years -Samuel Miller: 15 years -David Davis: 15 years -Joseph Bradley: 8 years -Ward Hunt: 5 years -Stephen Field: 18 years -William Strong: 7 years
 * __Members of the court and how long they were on the court:__ **

Our opinion of the case is that it was perfectly just for the Grangers to take this issue to court because it was a violation of the law and deliberate. The Grangers were spending more money than neccessary and fair. The railroads not capping their prices was in no way acceptable.
 * __ Personal opinion of the case: __**

If this case were to have gone the other way and the law was not passed to be able to have a maximum price for transportation of crops by train workers would stop sending crops or have a minimum number of crops being transported which would be bad business and also people who didnt have certain crops in there area would not be getting a larger production of them.
 * __ What if the case had gone the other way? __**

__**Bibliography: **__ []

[]

[]

[]

[]

**4.5/7 Biblio- This needs to be more than just a list of websites. Follow [|www.eastybib.com] ' s format.** **23/28 Content - You've got some inconsistencies that you need to iron out + more analysis / explanation of the court case.** **5/5 Organization - except for the Bib, it looks fine.**

**32.5/40 Total**