The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-12-01

That the defendants threaten a reduction In
the rates OF passenger fares, which are already
just and reasonable.
Complain of the Constitution.
That the provisions of the constitution of
the State OF California and the act of the Legis-
lature in aid thereof are in violation OF sec
tlon / CT the fourteenth amendment of the
constitution of the United States
There were filed with the bill affidavits sup
porting its allegations and a temporary re-
straining order was granted, and also an order
to show cause why 1t should not remain pend
ing the suit. Upon the hearing refuting affi.
davits were filed by respondents, and against
these and in support of the bill complainant
also filed other afidavits. There were also
presented voluminous extracts from the testi-
mony taken by the Pacific Railway Commits
sion to show a wasteful and extravagant con-
structson of certain of the roads, and also
diversion of the revenue to dividends instead
o. being employed in debt paying.
The case has been elaborately argued-how
elaborately is indicated by the fact that when
put into printed form the arguments of COM
plainants counsel occupy 1147 pages and
those of respondents 1881 pages. 1t is need
less to say that counsel were all able and that
neither abused nor wasted the opportunity
given to them nor neglected single topic
whirn could illustrate or expound the intricate
problems involved in the controversy. The
evidence and the arguments had to be con-
sidered by me, and this accoun is in part for
the time 1 have taken for decision. In part
it is accounted for by other and imperative
demands on my attention. This opinion will
be long, and, while there is justification for it,
have, nevertheless, leaned against too
elaborate exposition, but hope in avoiding
prolixity have not sighted any essential
proposition or failed to make my meaning
plain. 1
The many prop ositions urged upon my con-
sideration may not with clearness be tabu-
lated or presented in q determined order.
Some, however, naturally assume prece-
dence, and of these the two following are
earnestly and ably urged by the counsel for
respondents as settling the controversy:
1. That action on the grain resolution is
completed and hence the Board OF Railroad
Commissioners has no further Office to per-
FORM Or. putting it another way, the sched-
ule has'become the law OF the land, to be en-
forced by suit by the proper State officers or
by shippers.
q AS to the other resolution, which m ay be
called the 25 per cent resolution, action has
not gone far enough. 1t is claimed to be but
a resolution OF inquiry upon which action is
not yet determined.
At this point the court cited the sections
of the State constitution and the statutes
from which the commission derives its ex-
istence and powers. and continued as fol-
lows:
The constitution is certainly not clear and
interpre tation must be exercised by very
careful consideration of its language.
After providing for the election of Railroad
Commissioners, it enumerates their duties as
follows (Which shall number for the purpose
of distinction and reference):
Said Commissioners shall have the power
and it shall be their duty,
1. To establish rates OF charges for transpor-
tation of passengers and frelghts by railroad
and other transportation companies, and pub
lish the same from time to time with such
changes as they may make.
2. To examine the books, records and papers
of all railroad and other transportation COM
panies, and for this purpose they shall have
The power TO issue subpenas and all other
necessary process.
3. To hear and determine complaints against
railroad and other transportation companies.
to send for persons and papers, to administer
oaths, take testimony, and punish for cen.
tempt of their orders and processes in the
same manner and to the same extent as courts
of record. and TO enforce their decisions ana
correct abuses through the medium Of the
courts.
A. Said Commissioners shall subscribe (pre-