Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1892-02-28


and unstatesmanlike severity in the meas
ure if it is not adapted to the wishes Of the
people of Texas, the governor IS solely re-
spousible, and cannot escape the response
bility. Let US examine some of its provis-
ions and see how they compctt with states
manship
Section reads as follows:
IF any railroad company or other party
at interest be dissatisfied with the decision
of any rate, classification, rule, charge,
order, act or regulation adopted by the
commission, such dissatisfied company or
party may file petition setting forth the
particular cause or causes OF objection 10
such decision, act, rate, rule. charge, clas-
siication or order, or to either or all of
them, in court of competent jurisdiction
in Travis county, Tex, against said COM
mission as defendant. Said action shall
have precedence oyer all other
causes on the docket of q differ
determined as other civil causes in
the court Either party to said action may
appeal to the appellate court having juris-
diction of said cause, and said appeal shall
be at once returnable TO said appellate
court at either of its terms, and said action
so appealed shall have precedence in said
appellate court of all causes of different
character therein pending; provided, that
if the court be in session at the time such
right of action accrues, the suit may be
filed during such term and stand ready for
trial after ten days notice. "
This provision standing alone would
clearly give railroad dissatisfied with any
ruling or order of the commission a right to
appeal to some court in Travis county for
protection, though what court would have
Jurisdiction is left in an indefinite condition.
But this provision is delusive, and design
edly so. In other words,
1T IS A FRAUD,
taken and considered with other provisions
of the law, this right of appeal is incapa-
BILE of exercise except upon the contingency
Of practical confiscation. Looking to sec
ton 5, the section Immediately preceding
this, it will be found that in case of suits
between private, parties and any railroad
company brought under the law, the rates,
charges, orders, rules, regulations and
classifcations prescribed by the commits
sion before the institution of such action
are to be held conclusive and deemed and
accepted to be reasonable, fair and just,
and in such respects shall not be cOntro
verted thereon until finally found other
wise in a direct action brought for that
purpose as specified in section 6. In other
words, and to state the case more plainly,
upon the establishment of a rate by the
commission or the PRONUNCIATION of any
orders, in case litigation arises between the
railroads and any private person the rail-
business of such order or rate but the order
or rate made by the commission is conclu-
sive upon the court trying the case. 1t IS
as much as saying to the RAILROADS:
If you disobey our orders with reference to
rates, and o private person sues you for such
disobedience, you can come into court on
summons of the private person, but you
must stand muzzled. You can say neither
yea, nor nay
BUT LIKE SHEEP
before its shearers, you must not iopen
your mouth. You shall not question the
sense or justice of the order of the COM
mission but that order shall be conclusive
upon you in the suit and the court shall de-
eide against you as soon as the
fact is ascertaiued that you have disobeyed
the order whether the court is of the opin-
ion that it is reasonable and just, or the re-
verse.
Turning to section IA we find the obvious
purpose of section .. This section provides
that if any railroad company subject to the
act, or its agent or officer, shall hereafter
charge, collect demand or receive
from any person, company, firm
or corporation a greater rate, charge
or compensation than that fixed and
established by the railroad commission for
the transportation of freight, passengers or
cars, ETC., such railroad shall be deemed
guilty of extortion and shall forfeit and pay
to the state penalty of not less than one
hundred nor more than five thousand dol
lars. Section II provides that any railroad
which do, cause to be done or permit to be
done any matter, act or thing in this act
prohibited or declared to be unlawful, or
shall omit to do any act, matter or thing
herein required to be done by it, shall be
liable to the persons injured thereby for the
damage sustained in consequence of the vio-
lation, and in case the railroad company
should be
GUILTY OF EXToRTIoN
or discrimination as defined, then in addi-
ton to such damages the railroad company
shall pay to the person injured thereby a
penalty of not less than S125 nor more than
$500 to be recovered in any court of compe-
tent jurisdiction in any county into or
through which such railroad may run. And
the only defense permitted by this section
to the railroad is that it may prove that the
overcharge was unintentionaly and inno-
Gently made through mistake of fact.
So in cases of eXtortion or discrimination
as defined by the act, private citizen may
sue, not only for the damages but for the
penalties, and when suit is brought the
rate fixed by the commission is conclusive,
and there is no defense to the penalty eX-
cept the defense of mistake. And in ad-
dition to the penalty granted to theindivid-
ual, the state can also recover a penalty for
each act of not less than 800 nor more than
$4,000, and these penalties are cumulative.
Inc oppression OF the law may be explained
thus, so as to be plain TO the common IN
Outstanding. The commission may fix its
rate This rate may be so low as to amount
to
PRACTICAL coNFIsCATIoN
if adhered to by the company. If the rail-
road obeys the order of the commission it
means the destruction OF. the property I'M
der the law. If it refuses to obey and
thereby an action inures to private indi-
vidual, it may go into court, but can make
no defense, and penalties may be multi
piled in this way ad infinltum, because
each violation subjects the road to the pen
alties at the instance of any shipper. If
the road, in its vain search for rem
edy, should appeal to the courts
for protection, the rate prescribed
must be observed, regardless of its
damage or injury or unreasonableness, or
failing to observe it, the road must htigate
with the commission and subject itself in
case of failure to the recovery of penalty
to DE recovered by the state for each act of
violation during the progress of the litiga-
ton of not less than S1O0 nor more than
$4,000, which means, in plain English, that
if the road appeals to the court and dis
obeys the order of the commission on &C
count of its unreasonableness, and fails in
its litigation, the penalty will accumulate
so rapidly and so Overwhelmingly as to con-
fscate the property in behalf of the state
in case of such failure.
This may be illustrated further by the
example of public mill or gin among the
farmers. Assuming that the usual charge