The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1898-08-04

within its limits. II did say ,hs
Just how such compensation may b
Aseertained and What the ueee.sar
elements are in such an irauiry
would Always be An embarrrssin o,
Question. And in the case o. Coyins
ton and Lexington Turnpike Roa,
Co. vs.. Sanford, lGi. L. 8, 51s, III
supreme court said. "Esch cas-
must depend upon its special fact.
and wnen . court. without assumin,
itself to prescribe rates, 10 rquire,
to determine whether the rates pre-
scribed by the Legislature for q cor
poration controlling aIublic high
way are. as an entirety, SO uplus
As to destory the value Of its pro
pe.ty for all the purposes fo
which 1t was acquired, its duty is 4
take into consideration the interest,
both Of the public and Of the owner
OF the property. together with al
other Circumstances that are fairl,
to be considered in the determiniuc
whether the legislature has under
the guise Of regulating rates exceed
ed its constitutional authority, and
practically deprived the owner OF
property without due process of law.
The utmost that any corporation
operating a public highway can
.ightfully demand at the hands of
the legislature, when exerting it's
general powers, is that it receive
what. under all the circumstau ces.
is such compensation for the use Of
its property as will be just, both to it
and to the public"
In regard to whether the contention
of the complainant that it has a right
to earn enough to pay all of its fixed
charges, operating expenses and
taxes before the right of the State
to interfere becomes operative, the
Supreme Court in the case of Smyth
VS.. Ames. 1876 L. S. 543, says:
Cannot Ignore the Public.
"ln the discussion of the question
the plaintiff contended that q rail-
road company is entitled to exact
such charges for transportation as
will enable it, at all times, not only
to pay operating expenses, but also
to meet the interest regularly accru-
ing upon all its outstanding obliea-
tions, and Justify a dividend upon
all its stock; and that to prohibit it
from maintaining rates or charges
for transportation adequate to all
those ends will deprive it of its prop
erty without due process of law and
deny to it the equal protection of the
laws. This contention was the sub
Ject of elaborate discussion; and, as
1t bears upon each case in it's i'm
portant aspects, it should not be
passed without examination.
"In our opinion the broad propo-
sition advanced by counsel involves
some misconceptions of the relations
between the public and a railroad
corporation. 1t is understood in that
it practically excludes from con-
sideration the fair value of the prop
erty used, omits altogether any con-
sideration of the right of the public
to be exempt from unreasonable ex.
actions, and makes the interests of
the corporation maintaining a public
highway the sole test in determining
whether the rates established by OF
for it are such as may be rightfully
prescribed as between it and the pub
lie. A railroad is a public highway
and mono the less so because con-
structed and maintained through the
agency of corporation deriving Its
existence and powers from the State.
Such a corporation was created for
public purposes. 1t performs func-
tion of the State. Its authority to
exercise the right of eminent domain
and to charge tolls was given pri
marily for the benefit of the public.
1t Is under governmental control,
though such control may be exer-
eised with due regard to the consti-
tutional guarantees for tie protec-
ton of its property. Olcitt v. The
Supervisors, 16 Wall, 67S-694; Sink
ing Fund cases, 80 U. S. 7OO-7l9;
Cherokee Nation Y. Southern Kansas
Railway, 135 U. S. 641-657. 1t can
not, therefore, be admitted that q
railroad corporation maintaining q
highway under the authority of the
State may fix its rates with q view
solely to its own interests, and ig-
more the rights of the public. But
the rights of the public would be ig-
nored if rates for the transportation
OF persons or property on q railroad
are exacted without reference to the
fair value of the. property used for
the public or the fair value of the
services rendered, but in order sim
ply that the corporations may meet
operating expenses, pay the interes,
on its obligations, and declare a
dividend to stockholders.