The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1899-04-14
POSITION OF JUDGE REAGAN.

letter which he forwarded to the Dallas
News Saturday seems to conclusively
prove that his reasoning powers are fallen
into serious decay. He could not have
meant to deceive the people. yet, such
may be the result in some degree, unless
I attention Is called TO his evident want OF
comprehension OF the subject upon which
4 he writes. He is himself deceived.
Throughout this letter he treats the
I constitutional provision prohibiting con-
solidation OF railroads as II the provision
4 we're against the consolidation OF parallel
and competing lines. whereas II Is against
| parallel or competing lines. The whole
\ provision Is as follows:
4 Sec 8. No railroad or other corpora
ton, or the lessees, purchasers or nan-
ayers OF any railroad corporation, shall
consolidate the stock properly or fran
/ chises Of such corporation with, or lease or
purchase the works sor franchises OF, or
in any way control any railroad corpora
! ton owning or having under Its control
parallel or competing line; nor shall any
officer of such railroad corporation act as
an officer OF any other railroad corpora
i ton owning or having the control OF
parallel or competing line
~
He attacks decision OF the supreme
court OF Texas rendered ten years ago
constituting this section, and which has
stood as the unduestloned law of the
land since that time. and takes square
issue with the present governor upon his
reasons for vetoing the consolidation
measures. Speaking Of the Missouri, Kan
i sas and Texas and the Sherman. Shreve-
port and Southern railroads. he said: mo
| imagination could be so extravaganza as
| to assume that these were competing lines
of railway Yet. Judge Stayton, one of
the most eminent lawyers who has ever
sat on the bench In Texas. and who never
decided cases upon imagination, extrava-
giant or otherwise, held, speaking for the
whole court In the case above referred to,
that these were competing lines.
What can the Judge mean by such pas
sages as this:
III the principle shall be established
and adhered to that railways not under
the same ownership, management or con-
troll, can be coupled together or with other
railways in order to make a case of paral-
lei and competing railways, then the
Houston and Texas Central. the Missouri
Kansas and Texas and the Gulf. Colorado
and Santa Re railways upon the same
prniple may be held to be parallel and
competing railways, and their charters
may be forfeited.
Again:
III this is to be the established law OF
! Texas, not only the Houston and Texas
Central. the Missouri Kansas and Texas,
the Gult IOlOTuuO ana SdUtH re, lne bdi-
weston. Harrisburg and San Antonio and
tho Aransas Pass railways, but with xnem
, every railroad of Importance in Texas
will be liable to have their charters for
feited for being parallel and competing
, railways The sword of Damocles will be
suspended over them"
} These show that In the course OF pre-
! pairing the letter Judge Reagan entirely
lost the point. OF course. the lines named
are either parallel or competing lines;
, but they do not run any risk OF having
! their charters forfeited for being such.
9 The prohibition of the constitution Is not
{ against the building and operation OF
parallel and competing lines. 1t is
against the consolidation OF parallel or
Z competing lines, These lines are not at
g present consolidated They are operating
under separate arrangements. they are
4 competing and 1t is just that condition
that the constitutional provision was in
g tended to preserve that the public
would have the benefit of such competi-
e ton. VIII the Judge or anybody else deny
4 that should these lines consolidate their
Q charters could be forfeited. The sword OF
A Damocles Is indeed suspended over them
and IL ever they attempt to consolidate,
: the sword will drop Just as it has dropped
, by the governors veto In the cases of
ton. The maintaining of parallel lines
or OF competing lines Is not unlawful
but 1t would be unlawful under the sec
ton quoted to consolidate them and thus
D destroy competition.
So far as we are informed Judge Reagan
is the first to take the position that con
! Meeting lines can not be reckoned in as
pertaining whether two given lines are
competing. His position can not be main
, tained either in law or common sense.
I Let us suppose, for instance that the lu-
r ternational and Great Northern railroad
Z and the Cotton Belt railroad are lines OPP
a Grated under separate and Independent
arrangements. Would they not be COM
q petlng lines for Galveston freight original =
ing at Tyler, although the Cotton Belt
does not reach Galveston by some hun
! dreds of miles? II is true they are not
parallel lines. but the constitution says
!, parallel or competing lines. Would not
, the Cotton Belt compete with the Inter-
, national and Great Northern for Tyler
cotton destined to Galvestong II the cot
toa should go direct to Galveston by the
International and Great Northern the Cot
ton Belt would get nothing for It; but II
1t can offer such competition as would
make 1t cheaper for the shipper to send
his cotton by way of Corsicana and the
Central to Galveston. or by way of Waco
or McGregor over the Santa Fe or Mis-
souri,, Kansas and Texas TO Galveston,
It would get its proportion of the freight
money derived from the haul to Calves
ton; and thus 1t would certainly be a
competing line with the International and
Great Northern, and any legislative effort
to authorize the consolidation OF these
two properties would be for that reason
unconstitutional
~
1t is a fact we'll known here that when
the Kansas and Gulf Short Line was OPP
Grated by management independent OF
the Cotton Belt II was in sharp COMPETE
tion with that road and with the Interna-
tional and Great Northern for cotton to
|, Houston and Galveston. and local ship
!. pers here had great advantage In rates
from such competition, so much so, as
we have said In another article on the sub
iect, that even before the Kansas and
Gulf line was quite completed to Lurltin.
II was found cheaper 10 ship cotton over
that line and haul 1t in wagons from the
terminus TO the Houston East and West
Texas at Lufkin for shipment to Houston
and Galveston. than to send 1t direct by
! the International and Great Northern.
Rut sfnOK tha Kansas and Eulf Short Ifna