The San Francisco call., 1895-10-15
THE RAILROAD COMMISSIONERS ENJO|NED

ployed seventy-one general officers, at a
daily average compensation of S16 %, or a
yearly compensation of $361 079 o. Ex-
elusive OF general officers, for that year its
employees numbered 1904, the daily aver
age compensation was 81 54 and the yearly
cost was $i1 ,972, ,667 73.
"Tenth-9our orator further AYERS that
the rates now in force upon the several
railroads operated by it as aforesaid have
been liked according to circumstances and
conditions surrounding the traffic and
with careful regard for the financial,
commercial and competitive conditions
which enter into, affect or control the
making and relative adjustment of rates
and classifications and commodities in the
territory traversed by said railroads, and
are equitable and fair to the patrons OF said
railroads, and in many cases are now fixed
at the actual cost OF transportation by
reason OF competition with other carriers
by railroad and water"
The resolution adopted by the Board of
Railroad Commissioners September II,
1888, making the 8 per cent reduction at
issue and declaring the intention to make
25 per cent cut on other commodities, is
reclted, and also the service OF the new
schedule of grain rates on September 26.
1t is declared that the reductions were
made arbitrarily and without any evidence
showing that the reduced rates would be
Just or reasonable, but on the contrary all
the evidence before the board showed the
l.opposite. Such rates would work serious
and irreparable injury to and destruction
OF the property and property rights of the
complainant As nearly as can be estimated
| 1t would diminish the revenues of the
company more than 81, 800 900, leaving
them wholly insufficient to meet the
operating expenses and fixed charges of
the company and the deficiency for next
year would exceed S4,000,00O. The pro-
posed reduced rates would seriously affect
the interstate business of the company
besides.
1t is alleged that the defendants threaten
to reduce passenger fares, which are just
and reasonable, and thus further prevent
the complainant from paying its expenses
A strong point is sought to be made oi
the election OF La Rue and Stanton on
party platforms, pledging the nominees tc
effect an average reduction in railroad
rates OF Is per cent. The defendants
named were elected because of that pledge
and the defendants (Stanton and La Rue
are alleged to be disqualified thereby
! from acting as members of the board
/ in fixing freight rates. The action
! OF these Commissioners was no
( taken in good faith, it is alleged
/ but pursuant to that pledge without re
reductions, and, therefore, the actions OF
these defendants are void as to the com
plainant and deprive it of its property
without due process of law and deny t
it the equal protection of the laws.
Then, Commissioner La Rue is said tt
be raising and shipping agricultural prod
ucts, and as such has an interest in the re
| ductions, and is disqualified.
The provisions of the constitution o
California and of the Legislative act which
give the Railroad Commission its authority
are attacked as in conflict with section
of the fourteenth amendment to the con
stitut;on of the United States in making
no provision for hearing of carrier, pro
viding that the commissions rates shall il
| all civil or criminal controversies bt
deemed conclusively just and reasonable
and making no provision for judicial de
termination of the justice of rates imposed
4 restraining Injunction enioining tht
defendants from adopting or putting int
effect any schedule of rates in accordance
with the said resolutions of the Board o
Railroad Commissioners, or from reducin!
any of the passenger or freight rates of tht
complainant, or from instituting am
action to enforce such reduced rates
pending the hearing of the complaint
is asked for. The complaint is signed by
c. P. Huntington, president of the com
! pany, ". f. Herrin, solicitor, and ]. c.
Martin, J. E. Foulds and E. S. Pillsbury
| of counsel