The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1897-02-09

whose strictncss is unnecessary to the &C.
complishmcnt Of tho beneficial purposes
for which II had been adopted" Cooley on
constitutional limitations. LAG. and author
tiles cited. Again. It IL said; None Of the
provisions Of the statute should be regards
cd AS unconstitutional when they relate
directly or Indirectly to the Same subject,
and are not foreign to the subject cxprcss-
ed In the title" See Austin va Gulf. Col.
orado and Santa Fe Railway. IS Texas, 267,
ana authorities therein cited.
While this wharf company's charter, au-
thorising II TO build and operate this road.
is dated August 4. 1870. the facts show
that tho road was not built until about
1878. after tho general railroad incorpora-
ton act was adopted by our legislature.
August 10. 1876 and II was not then nee.
ossary. II II ever was, to insert n clause
in the charter TO receive and convey pcr-
sons and property. Revised Statutes. ar
ticle 3AS2. Nor Is Vt necessary by express
terms to grant In the charter tho right to
own rolling stock end connect with other
roads All railroads have that power under
the general laws of this State. I'm fact Il
Is prescribed Az n duty, Revised Statute.
articles 1897 ii99, ihas, 1919. a536 and
1855. And II need not be expressed In the
tito or body of the charter. and In my
judgment 1t was never necessary. The right
TO build aud own a railroad carries with IL
right to operate tho road imposes n duty
TO furnish the necessary cars and other
facilities necessary TO accommodate tho
traffic over that limo OF road Including
necessary freight and passenger dcpnts
In this connection II IL asked. how could
we consider this Il railroad under the laws
OF this state when u has no rolling stock
or dcpots OF any sort MY reply ~. that
under it's charter II has tho right TO own
them and II mnat do so whenever and
wherever there Is a necessity for II 10 do
80, Az It Is, the necessary rolling stock
and depois arc furnished by other roads,
who have leased the right TO use this
track wh'lo consigncc receives on tho
wharvcs and M other points along this
inc their consignmcnts direct from the
cars into their building erected for tho
"Npress purpose of accommodating all such
shipments nv are intended or desired to be
shipped over this limo OF railroad. And
while the facilities ara being furnished by
these other railroad companies and other
persons tand they seem to be ample and
conveniently locatod) there is no neocs-
| Sly Tor tubs railway company To furnish
other and different or additional facilities.
Hut we are reminded that heretofore this
commission refused to assume jurisdictiou
| over the Dcnisnn aud Pacific Suburban rail-
way when II applied for authority to issue
and regulate bonds. because It was char
| tered and huilt az a suburban railway, ex-
| tending ont less than ten miles beyond tho
| city limits Whereas, 1t now appears that,
notwithstanding the wording of It's charter,
II now forms link in a great trunk line
tho TEXAS and Pacific railway, over which
" carries an immense volume Of commerce.
from ocean To ocean. II that Ia true, my
| reply is that IT. Is no longer operated as q
suburban line, nor by its chartered COM
| nany, bni by its lcaseos ma trunk line, and
| while We can not issue bonds 10 a suburban
| M he rad h,fn lion
on the property of that company, yet when
| u is operated by n lessee as n part OF
trunk line. for the accommodation OF the
public generally and no, Cor mere To-
calty, ! think II w subject, IN the hands
OF tho lossoc operating It, to the tariff rates
| hved by the commission. while 40 operated.
This In no vile affects the rights Of the
owners to bond II AT pleasure without tho
| consent Of the commission
| Again, We are reminded that on one 0cca-
sion, MS late a. January 20. 1896 In answer
| to q letter OF inquiry from private citizen,
we stated. IN substance. that this Wharf
| company had no ears or other rolling stock.
| and that we had no Jurisdiction over 1t. and
| II Is commended that, to be consistent we
should adhere to the Wow then expressed.
| In reply, II Is sufficient to nay that wa
viii not at any tImo hesitate 10 change any
| ruling we make IN we conclude. after a care.
tul investigation. that wo have erred In
| the cnse referred TO the inquiry was not
| such MS required either n careful investiga-
| ton or direct ruling upon n case or dis
! pmte az to our Jurisdiction, and no question
| has ever been presented 10 the commission
| before really requiring a decialon on the
question Of Jurisdiction OF the commission
| to make freight rates. We have simply.
without investigation, assumed that we had
| no Jurisdiction. and have therefore failed
| TO act
Holding az we do that section Of this
g.. Will
| II the company would hav, the Same rights
] as therein granted. Il follows. therefore.
f, that the right therein given ito charge and
| receive compensation for transporting pas
| scngers and freight Sin accordance with the
general railroad law Of the State" and
| since, under the Laws OF this State. tho
| right to AK rates can he exercised alone by
| the commission, there Is no alternative left
us but to assume Jurisdiction over this
road. even though It may he considered an
| elephant" on cur hands.
| One other. thought Ia suggested to my
| mind No one ccnteUds that there Is any
| power lodged anywhere by law. nor Is there
f. any attempt by Inv - regulate charges on
street lines. nor on suburban or belt lines
Of railway in this State and never was;
| but here the legislature expressly says, ~
granting this charter. that the state shall
| dy It's charges for freight rates aud passen-
| ger fares. which seems to us a positive ana
| emphatic declaration by the aw-makine
power OF this state that this is not Street
railway nor a suburban or belt llne OF rail-
way" over which tho State. through ~
| railroad commission. hes no Jurisdiction -
| Tx freight rates. The plea to The jur1"dic-
| tion should be ovcrrncd
L. J. Storey, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN REAGAN DISSENTS.
w. l.. Moody & Co. ct al. complainant
VS.. Galveston Wharf company. respondent
The respondent presents plea denying
| the turisdiction OF this commission in the