The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1888-11-27

suits (namng ihem) to recover The penaitieS
prescribed by the ACT for charges in excess OF
rates so fixed that nnmerOus persons who have
been charged by complainant more than the
rates fixed by defendants relying on the snthor-
iy Of defendants Ia fix rates have brought SUITS
against complainant To recover dtmlg TOR
said alleged excessive charges; that said SUITS OF
The State and of the sail persons ale now pend
ing, and the d"lcn lantS announce their inteh-
ton to procure O. her suits IL be br3u hit by the
Attorney General for every case Ot \ charge ny
complainant in excess of the rates fixed by them,
and there are numerous cases ol such excess. ana
conf lainant will continue to So charge untIl 1t
be juaicially determined that II has not me right
to do SO; that defendants have not the power 10
determine the Justice or rcasonablen"Ss OF com
painantS chlrg"s because that involves Jn-
dcial function which they are inhhi'ed from eX-
ercisng by the constitution of the ) ate: that II
not judicial it is Legislative, and cinnof b" eXer-
cised by deten ants: that it defendants have
any power whatever in the premises II IS re-
strcted to fixing rates that are in tact just and
reasonable, and they cannot require com .)lalnant
to reduce its rates to charges which are nol rea-
sOnabe and Just to II; and that The rates .'res
cribed BY defendants are much less IN IN those
heretofore charged by complainant Tor the same
services, and are neither ust and reasonable; Tor
though its charges have been much greater than
is allowed bv the rates tiXel by defendants, and
have brought a much larger gross income than
would he realized from said rates, yet complain
ant has not only failed to realize any interest upon
its investment but has failed to realize enough
to meet the necessary expenses connected with
the operation and ownership OF lis road.
The bill then proceeds to give hgures and
statements rs TO the cost Of construction and
equipment of the road, and Is actual value and
to earnings and expenses OF It's operation,
going to show excess Of expenses over earnings,
and actual loss from the op ration Of the road
during the more than five years OF such op-
GRAFTON to date and alleges facts in regard to
the condition and business OF the country
through which the road runs 10 show that such
loss, even on the basis ofits charges, will probab
ly continue tor some years. II further alleges
that the rates prescribed by defendants arr also
unreasonable and unjust when compared with
those permitted hv them to other roads in the
Stale giving figures To show the difference and
that reduclon of It's charges 10 the rates pre-
scrbed by defendants would comp i Dmptainant
to torcgo any possibility ~ earning interest on
lis investment or any income from the operation OF
lis road, and that Ia continue tn" operation at an
actual loss would render is road vaurle>s; and
that defendants cannot rlcr the Nv - act rs
TO produce This result for thereby complainant
would be deprived nt is property without !u-
process Of law contrary to provision OF section
l. Article XIV OF The Constitution of !hc / lited
S,a'ps The PRAYER OF the bill was for Inc re-
lief which granted BY the Injunction
On the argument Of the drm'lrrer t. he bin
the Commissioners ilci az afii itv.t, intended
mainly 10 show mat ia their dealings with COM
plainant they w"lc not he'd f. expect such com
plainrs as The bill makes, and they say thAl if
applIcatoa had been made 10 tn I'm Tor 4 cAAur.
or increase in the rates anI il had Appeared -
them reasonable and ju>', they loub les would
have made }Hn'cr changes, rs they iii IA casts
OF appicuiinn bG other roads.
The preliminary question raised by the dcmur-
rer arise, on Two # is ground-, he 81 An IN
VIZ :: BID. lhal thc court IA no lri> ,tton at