18 A.2d 826 | N.H. | 1941
Our prior decision in this controversy, Welch Company v. State,
The contention of the plaintiff that "the two laws do not deal with the same subject matter" and that the New Hampshire statute, together with the regulations of the Public Service Commission thereunder are merely highway regulations, whereas the Federal regulations are designed to protect interstate commerce and workers engaged in it, can hardly be adopted in view of the fact that the section of the statute herein involved, Like the applicable rules of the Interstate Commerce Commission, deals specifically with "hours of service." Laws 1933, c. 106, s. 8; Motor Carrier Safety Regulations of the Interstate Commerce Commission, part 5.
Equally unavailing is the contention of the plaintiff that the two regulations may stand together. "Supplementary as well as conflicting regulations of the same subject by the states are, therefore, *330
precluded by the Federal Constitution as it has been interpreted by the Supreme Court." University Overland Express, Inc. v. Griffin,
These two arguments, particularly the first one, together with their corollaries, are the chief reliance of the plaintiff. They cannot be adopted. We therefore conclude that the New Hampshire regulations here in question have been superseded by those of the Motor Carrier Act of 1935 and the regulations of the Interstate Commerce Commission prescribed thereunder. This conclusion renders it unnecessary to decide the other three questions reserved by the Superior Court.
Bill dismissed.
All concurred.