Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1875-03-12

Vile and Chattanooga Railroad Company
has made an arrangement with the East
Tennessee and Virginia Railroad Company
to give through bills Of lading over its road,
the Alabama and Chattanooga railroad,
which is utterly insolyent, can require the
Nashville road to give through bills Of la
ding over its road also; and if it can be
shown that the Nashville and Chattanooga
railroad has agreed to recognize, and be re-
spOnsible for through bills Of lading for
goods passing over one of these roads
It must also recognize those passing over
the other. Il is difficult to see why rail-
roads should not have the same tight to
make their contracts that is accorded TO in
dividuals. 1t is well settled that every
railroad that becomes a party to a through
bill Of lading is held liable as a cO-partner
with all the other roads, and may be made
to pay for loss whenever 10 NAV occur on
the line; and it is clear that we have no
constitutional power 10 require a solvent
railroad TO become responsible for the de-
falcatiOns of one that is irresponsible.
Again, the section allows any outside rail-
road 70 force itself As party into any
special contract that our roads may see
proper to make, and to enjoy all the facili-
ties, benefits and advantages arising there
from, without requiring such outside road
to contribute anything upon its part as an
equivalent for what it receives. To illus
trate: we have one road running from
Nashville 70 Chattanooga, and another
from Nashville TO Decatur, built by our
own citizens out Of their own funds, and
while the State aided them BY its credit,
they have fully protected it, and the State
has sustained no loss on their account.
The first Of these roads has a northwestern
connection running to Hickman, KY, and
the other a northeastern connection run
ming TO Louisville. There is a third road
running from Nashville nOrthWestWardly
to Henderson, but it owns no line south
of Nashville. The Chattanooga road pro-
poses to the Decatur road that it will carry
all freight coming over the Louisville road
destined for Chattanooga, Atlanta, ETC., at
a certain rate, provided the Decatur
over the Hickman route and
destined for Decatur, Montgomery,
etc, at the same rate, the rate in both in
stances being less than it would be Jut for
the existence Of this special contract be-
tween them. Now the object Of the bill is
to allow the Henderson road to force itself
as party into this special contract, and get /
the reduced rates that the other two roads
allow each other, without requiring the
Henderson road to furnish any equivalent /
to the other two roads for the facilities, ben
etits and advantages it would OBTAIN by be-
ing admitted as a partner into their asSOci- |
alton.
In other words, the Chattanooga road
agrees 20 take freights over its Southern
for the Louisville road for less /
than the usual rate, provided the Louisville |
road will reciprOcate by taking freights over |
its Southern connection for the same rate
for the Hickman road. Each can and does
offer the other full equivalent for all the |
it receives; so long as they car
" for each other at the same rate, it mat.
teTs not as between them whether the rate
be high OF low, but the lower they can az
ford to charge each other the better they
are both able to compete with lines out
side Of the State, and the cheaper are
freights 70 the business community. But
the Henderson road refuses to build q
Southern connection for its road, and it re-
fuses to contribute anything towards pay
ing for the Southern connections Of the
other roads, and yet it demands to share |
equally in all their advantages. This is |
not Just 20 our own roads. If the Hender- |
soil road will force itself into partnership, !
il ought AZ least 90 furnish its share Of the /
capital, by building a Southern connection |
which is very much needed, but which |
will never be built if the Henderson |
road is allowed 70 avail itself Of all /
the advantages offered by the Southern |
Of the other two roads, with /
out being required to contribute toward the /
cost Of their construction.
Besides, it would be unjust to force those |
two roads 70 take into partnership the |
Henderson Road, which is bankrupt, and /
now in the hands Of a receiver, and be- |
come responsible for damages under its |
bills Of lading. Corporations, like indi- /
own contracts and manage their own af- /
fairs. Any interference by the Legislature |
with this general principle, at the instance |
Of any particular railroad, is nothing but |
special legislation in disguise, and is Op-
posed alike to sound policy and the inter |
ests Of our section.
Sec. 4. So far as this section requires |
railroad companies TO receive and haul the |
cars of other roads, this is now required by |
section 1120 Of the Code. So far as the |
bill proposes to compel railroads to ex- |
change cars with each other, We have no /
power to require it. What !
right would We have 10 force the East Ten |
nessee, Virginia and Georgia Railroad |
Company to send theirOWn cars Overthe Ala |
bama and Chattanooga Railroad, which is |
in a TuinOus state Of repair, and wholly IN |
able TO pay for cars that may be wrecked by |
the negligence Of its employees, or the def |
ciencies Of its road? SO far as the bill re- |
quires them "tO collect or advance back |
charges on freight the same objection |
arises. Every railroad is bound by the |
law as il now stands to receive all freight, |
by WhOmsOever rendered, and to transport !
il promptly in the order Of its tender; but |
it has the right to demand in advance the |
Of the freight over its own line. |
But the bill in question not only takes |
away the charter right TO demand its own |
freight in advance, but requires |
the railroad TO pay to the company |
rendering the freight for transpOrta- |
ton all the back charges that may be
due, to all the various carriers who have |
handled the freight. We have !
no power to force any railroad to become |
part Of a through line, and responsible |
for connecting roads, without its consent;
and whenever. it pays back charges on |
freight, it becomes responsible for the acts |
Of every carrier on the line, not only for |
the loss Of the goods but for the correctness /
OF the charges.
The 9Th section imposes a penalty for
the violation Of the law, whether the act
such violation be committed
in this Stale or out Of it. 1t is clear that
our laws can have no extra territorial Oper-
alton, and it would seem absurd for our
courts to attempt to punish a man upon the
idea that he had violated law Of Tennes-
see, in the State OF New York, where no
such law could be enforced. Even if we
could punish our own roads for violations
Of our laws beyond our limits, we surely
cannot punish the roads OF other States for
the violation Of those laws, and unless we
can control the roads which connect with
oWs outside Of the State, It is impossible
to control the matter Of through freights.
If Congress could pass general law Oper-
ating in all the States, possibly something
might be done; but separate State action is
worse than useless, as it viii breed law
suits, that will effect nothing but heavy ex-
penses upon the litiganta, and consequent
confusion in the transportation business
Of the country.
Z. L. GARDENHIRE,