The great West. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1889-18??, 1890-02-14
The Nebraska State Board Of Transportation Commissioners
GREAT INTEREST TO OTHER WESTERN STATES.


luties enjoined upon it by it's char
Ter. That power and duty devolve
upon the state tribunal
The r. r. Co., VS.. the p. & 0. C. r.
r. Co., 62 Maine 269.
A railroad is a public highway and
all persons may use it in the manner
in which property can be used.
Ancott VS.. the Supervisors, Is
Wallace 695.
The respondent has no right to say
that ''A'' shall have access to it's
depot for the purpose of purchasing
his ticket and having his baggage
checked, and "B' be excluded. The
cannot exclude from the
benefits of it's station a person who
goes there for the purpose of being
transported upon it's road. It can
not make rules for the shipper of
freight and make different rules as to
another shipper of the same kind of
freight
Itcannot permit one shipper ofcat-
tie to use the shipping yards on it's
grounds and exclude another; and
upon what principle, grounds or rea
son, can the respondent when it is
compelled by law to furnish all the
necessary means, Observation-Disclosures"
and implements, for the receiving
and shipment OF freight, and give all
equal facilities) say to the grain pro-
ducers in the vicinity of, and who
ship their grain at, Elmwood: you
cannot ship your grain over this
road, but you must first sell it to the
elevator man, whom we have chosen
and authorized to erect elevators at
this station for the handling and
shipping OF the grain purchased. You
cannot ship a bushel OF grain over
this line of road.
Is this serving all parties without
any discrimination, impartially, and
without any favoritism?
Yet this is the exact state of affairs
at Osceola station, and it results
from the manner in which the re-
spondent conducts the business of
transporting the grain from said
station.
The complaint is not asking to
take any part of the respondent
property, but it is asking to have the
respondents property used in the car
rying business just as the law says
it shall be used without discrimina-
ton.
The respondent acquired it's prop
erty for the purpose of erecting ele-
vators upon it for the shipment OF
grain. 1t holds it's property charged
with public servitude; and just so
long as it permits shippers Of grain
to build and operate elevators for
the shipment of grain upon it's line Of
road, it will have to grant this same
right upon the same terms and con-
ditions to all other shippers of grain
so long as it is in the bounds of rea-
son for it to do SO.
Any other rule would give it's ia
vorite the absolute monopoly of the
grain trade, and leave the producers
at their mercy.
The transportation of grain from
the grain producing portion of Ne
braska is different from the trans
portation OF any other commodity
1t is produced in large quantities
and the larger portion of it is corn
The price is low, the cost of cribbine
is comparatively great; and the pro.
ducers are generally in debt and can
not hold their corn.
The greater portion of corn is
shipped in the months of December
January and February. During this
season there not sufficient cars to
ship it as fast as it is delivered al
the stations. so it is necessary tC
have some place to store it until the
railroad company can transport il
to market. It will not stand much
handling by shovel-power, for the
price is so low that the cost woulC
consume it; and the railroads have
not sufficient cars nor sufficient side
tracks to receive the grain from
wagons. 1t is useless to contend
that an elevator with all modern i'm
prOvements is not an absolute neces
sity for the shipment of grain from
the corn belt of this state: and the
elevators must be built adjacent to
the side track.
The respondent having deliberate
ly, and of it's own choice established
the custom OF granting elevator priv
ileges on it's depot grounds, to per
sons who purchase gram for ship
ment over it's road, cannot shield it
self under the plea that ''its DrOperty
is it's own private property, and that
the compelling the same privilege tc
other parties who desire to ship the
4 grain they have produced and may
purchase, would be taking private
property for private use or taking
private property without just com
pensation"
Monopoly and favoritism is odious
to the law. According to the rules O
the common law, which have been ir
force for over three hundred years