Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-12-24

transportation companies. 20 Article !
| provides that the traffic subject to this
| agreement shall be all freight and pas
senSer business except express and mail
carried by lines, parties hereto which has
origin or destination i'll tina state of Texas
other than business TO or from Ell Paso,
Eagle Pass and Laredo proper. - The
| managing body of the association
Is an executive committee COM
posed of one member from
each party to the agreement.
They are to elect commissioner who is
the chief executive officer. 1.-The ex-
ecutive committee shall agree upon the
classification and rates concerning the
traffic subject TO the agreement. No
member shall directly or indirectly re-
duce rates, etc. Any violation of the
agreement is to be reported to the COM
missioner, who shall "check the irregu-
larity if he can. can rates, rules and
regulations when adopted by agreement
or by arbitration shall be simultaneously
furnished by the commissioner to the
traffic department for all numbers of the
association, for the guidance OF
all the parties interested - etc.
Without quoting further, we think it ap-
parent that leading object, if not the
sole object of the association, is by the
appointment of q common governing
committee to fix rates of transportation
so as TO prevent competition among the
several parties to the contract. We
think it also apparent, from the language
OF the section of the state constitution,
that its leading object was to prevent
competing lines of railroad in the state
from so lettering themselves by CONSOLE
dalton, lease or other agreement by
which one should in any way subject itself
to the control of another, so IS to stitie
competition for the traffic OF the state.
The section prohibits any railroad COM
pany, or the managers of any such COM
pany, from controlling in any way an
other company owning a competing line.
If one is prohibited from making such q
contract, we think two or more are pro-
hibited, and that when one company
enters into an agreement with others,
any one of which owns or controls q COM
peting line of said railroad, by
which it subjects itself to the
government of a body appointed by
all parties to the agreement, that such
company places itself under the control
of the other to definite extent, and acts
in violation of the constitution of the
state. The manner and extent of the
control is immaterial. But 1t is insisted
committee is required involving sever
ance; because the votes are subject to be
changed in certain manner pointed out
in the agreement; because any
member may withdraw upon
giving ninety days. notice, and
because no penalty is prescribed for q
violation of the articles, the agreement
does not subject one road to the manage
ment or the control of another, but it is
apparent that as long as one company re-
mains member of the association it is
controlled as to rates by the executive
committee, and is not free to enter into
competition with its associates for
freights, The executive committee upon
its appointment, are made to the extent
of their powers, managers of all the
companies, and hence, when a company
subjects itself to the power of the commit
tee by entering the association
it places itself under the control of man.
ayers of other railroads. We cannot see
that the fact that q member has tho
right of withdrawal, or that it cannot be
punished for failure to obey the regula-
lions can make any difference as to this
case. But it Is further argued that be-
cause it has not been shown that they
have made charges for freight or passen-
gers in excess of the limits allowed by
law, their action is not illegal. But we do
not understand that the state seeks to re-
strain them from Illegal charges made
under the direction of the association,
but for doing an illegal thing in entering
into and carrying out the terms OF the
agreement for the association. 1t is not
quite clear to our minds, that even in
the absence of the constitutional provision
we have under discussion, the Defend
% 10, i
being in restraint of competition and
contrary to public policy. But i. is
further insisted that because the agree
ment in question concerns interstate
commerce, neither the state
in its political capacity nor
its courts have any jurisdic-
ton over the matter. We understand
the agreement to embrace both COM
MERGE within the state and commerce be-
tween this state and other states. The
former might be enjOined if the latter
could not. We are inclined to the opin-
ION that if none of the corporation COM
panies in the association owed their eX-
istences to our laws, that the state would
have no power to prohibit or interfere
with u contract of this character in so far
as it regulates charges upon freight
carried to and fro beween' this
and other states. 1l8 N. s., 557.
But we have a very different question.
Several of the defendant corporations are
chartered under the laws of this state. If
we are correct in our conclusions we think
1t follows that the defendant corporations
who derive their charters from the state
are acting in violation of law in entering
into this contract of association-some of
the members of the association being
connecting lines of road. We think the
association, being illegal as to some of the
defendants, is illegal as to all. We are of
opinion that the association under
consideration is clearly illegal as to some
of the parties to it; aga,Ihgt being illegal
as to some it is illegSfas tSsall, and may
be restrained The judgment is therefores
afiirped. Gaines, Associate Justice.
= 4 II zE-
A%Eee-1ai-z4.,yas 49, . s %lk4