The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1901-02-16

a
under its provisions
To question ~ the following reply
is given: Since the organization Oh
this commission 1t has been cons antis
and busily engaged in carrying out the
duties enjcined upon IL by law. making
freight rates. collecting and rep ring
evidence concerning REBATES, dscrimina
tions, eNtortion and abuses, as VIII tuiiy
appear frcm an insSnction Of the nine
annual reports issued by the commission
There have been brief Intervals, II any
that the attorney generals office has
been clear of consideration either OF suits
requested by us b be brought or suits
of Injunction against us. At times that
office had had on hand for consideration
so many rebate and discrimination cases
referred there by us as 10 tax IL TO the
urn st and leave little or no time fcr
the ether duties pertaining to II. Al ths
present time there are several matters
pending Though no suits for canoe L.
ton Of excessive issues of stocks and
bonds have been by us requested to De
brought. still it is within our knowledge
that some Of the facts stared In answer
"A CT this communication have also been
known TO the att,rney generals oiice.
referring to chapter 10, title "a, of
the Revised Statutes 1880 OF Texas, that
Being a reproduction OF the law prlyid-
ing for the creation of this c-mmissi n
and defining its duties, attention Is re-
spectfuliy directed to articles 1870 and
1871 Il said chapter (sections IL ami IL
Of the original act) specifying the duties
enjoined upon the commission respect
ing the gathering OF Information con-
corning the issuance Of stocks and bolds
by railroad companies The terms OF
that law have been complied with in all
respects, as will appear frlm inspection
Of the first annual report of this coz
mission, copy Of which is furnished here
with, as above stated. This commission
has net been directed by law TO take ac-
ton respecting the Institution of liti-
cation to have cancelled excessive Issues
II stocks and bonds.
whether or not such membranes are
invalid and subject 10 cancellation in
wolves legal problems that should, 1t
would seem, properly belong to the law
department of the government for con-
sideration and action.
I'm the case If the forfeiture Of the
charters of private corporations article
A. section 90 of the State CONSTITUTE Il,
among other things provides thai the at
torney general shall represent the state
in ell suits and pleas in the supreme
ccur Of the State, in which tn 5 state
may '@e a party, and shall espe cially In
quiIe into the charter rights CT all pri-
waite corporations, and from time to time,
In the name of the State. take such action
in the courts as may be proper and neces-
sary to prevent any private corporation
from exercising any power not
authorized by law. He shall, whenever
sufficient cause exists, seek a judicial
forfeiture OF such charters, unless other
wise expressly provided by law and give
legal advise in writing to the governor
and other executive officers when re-
queSted by them So that it is seen
that the trainers OF the State constitu-
ton have pointed out the method of prs
ceeding in cases where such forfeiture
should be made.
Article l09S, paragraph /. of the Re-
vised statutes, provides that the district
courts Of the State shall have defined
jurisdiction of all suits in behalf of TIE
State to recover penalties and escheats
And article 1884, paragraph p, of the
Revised Statues. provides that sui S in
behalf of the State for the forfeiture Of
the charters OF private corporations,
chartered by the act Of the legislatu. e.,
shall be commenced in the district court
Of the county in which the seat Of he
government may be So IL is seen that
the constitution and laws direct the off,
Ger and provides the tribunal and juris-
diction where such forfe!tures may be
sought, and these provisions certainly
leave nothing for this commission to do
70 that end. In such a case the interven-
ticn of a jury and it's verdict on the facts
are essential.
Assuming that it is competent for the
State to procure the cancellation of such
excessive issues of stocks and tonds, the
results b. follow, such as placing the rail-
roads of the State in the hands of re-
oeivsrs, expensive and tedious litigation,
ETC., involve questions Of public policy
that we believe ought to be determined
by the honorable legisla tdre.
we can not, at present at least, an
swer the question as to how many Ststes
in the Union have laws prohibiting Tree
passes for the reason that We nave not
file Of the constitutions and statutes
OF the various States, and on inquiry at
The supreme court library we find that
II contains the statutes of only few
States. We have in our own library an
nual or biennial reports of the railroad
commissioners of nearly all of those
States which have railroad commissions,
and these reports frequently contain en-
tire statutes and extracts from statutes
and constitutions relating to their duties
and sometimes those relating generally
TO common carriers. These have been
carefully examined with the result that
the most stringent provisions against free
passes found by US are n the constitu-
tion of Ken,ucky We have been verbal
ly informed that New York, Wisconsin,
North Carolina, Florida and Louisiana
have stringent provisions against the
issuance OF free passes, but an eXamina
Ton OF the New York constitution and
statutes revised to 1889 fails to verify
the statement, and so far as Louisiana
Is concerned we have seen several passes
good for the current year in that State.
Section 1892 OF the annotated code
OF Mississippi statutes, 1892, makes 1t un-.
lawful Tor any railroad to grant passes
or tickets. etc, free or at reduced rates
not applicable TO all persons alike, but
contains numerous exceptions, which,
however, must be reported annually 10
the railroad commission, showing to
whom and for what reason granted, under
penalty prescribed in section 1928.
From the reports of railroad commits
sloners We ascertain the fact that in near
~ every State in which there is a rail-
road commission. the commissioners and
tnelf employees are vested with the right,
under law. 10 free transportation by com
lon carriers. when on Official business
ms IS the case even in Connecticut,
WheFe It Is unlawful for a railroad COM
peuy 10 issue free transportation to a
mt mper or member-elect of the general
assembly.
From such information as we have
oeeh able 10 gather, we conclude that
Jew, II any, OF the States have lava gen