330 HARVARD LAW REVIEW. ground. Nevertheless, there is no reason to say that it was im- properly decided on the theory upon which the court rests it, or that a carriage of freight or passengers through one State in the course of a transportation between two points in another is not ex necessitate interstate commerce within the meaning of the Con- stitution. So far, however, as i]Q powers of taxation of the State of the two termini are concerned, it must now be conceded that they have been specifically declared to extend to the intrastate part of the gross receipts from such a carriage without an inva- sion of the commercial clause of the Constitution.^ (3) C, in Vermont y to D, in Connecticut^ through or across Massa- chusetts. This is plainly interstate commerce.^ (4) A, in Massachusetts y to C^ in Vermont. (5) ^y ^^^ Vermont y to A, in Massachusetts. There was never any question that the preceding two cases pre- sent instances of interstate commerce.^ (6) Ay in Massachusetts, to C, in Vermont, or C, in Vermont, to A , in Massachusetts, passing over a Massachusetts railroad, A to B, situate wholly within Massachusetts. This case is presented in Norfolk & Western Railroad Co. v. Pennsylvania,* where the plaintiff in error was a corporation organized under the laws of both Virginia and West Virginia, with its road situate entirely within those States, but forming part of a through line starting in Pennsylvania and known as the Great Southern Despatch. The court said, at page 119: — " That is to say, the business of the through line of railroad, of which the plaintiff in error forms a part or in which it is a link, consists, in a measure, of carrying passengers and freight into Pennsylvania from other States, and out of that State into other States. It certainly requires no citation of au- thorities to demonstrate that such business — that is, the business of this through line of railroad — is interstate commerce. That being true, it logi- cally follows that any one of the roads forming a part of, or constituting a link in, that through line, is engaged in interstate commerce, since the busi- ness of each one of those roads serves to increase the volume of business done by that through line." 1 Lehigh Valley Railroad Co. v. Pennsylvania, supra. 2 Reading Railroad Co. v. Pennsylvania, 15 Wall. 232, 280; Fargo v. Michigan, 121 U. S. 230, 241. 8 Reading Railroad Co. v. Pennsylvania, 15 Wall. 232, 280; Fargo v. Michigan, 121 U. S. 230, 241 ; Philadelphia & Southern Steamship Co. v. Pennsylvania, 122 U. S.326. 4 136U. S. 114.
