The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1904-12-20
Evidence That Should
Have Been Admitted
in Selma COnnec-
ton Case.
Justice R. N. Douglass Puts the Clinch-
ers on the Decision of the SUI
preme Court Requiring
Selma Connection.

The Selma connection case is neceS-
sary and it is reasonable and imposes
no hafdships on the railroad.
Below is printed the concurring
opinion Of Justice Douglas which is
ii "clincher'' Every lawyer and lay
man Will see that the Commission did
right TO order the connection made.
Corporation Commission V. Railroad
Company No. 223. Wake County.
Douglas. j. (concurring). l fully
concur in the opinion OF the court;
but there is a question omitted there
from which, though perhaps not es-
sential to the present decision of the
court. may become of the gNaatest inn
portance in view of the Federal ques-
ton raised. or attempted to be raised.
bv the defendant. l think there was
error in excluding. upon the Objec-
ton of the defendant. answers to the
following questions asked by the
plaintiff, tO-Wit:
20. Mr.. Borden. what is the stock
of the Atlantic Coast Line worth to-
day?
o. What was the stock of the Will
mington & Weldon Railroad Company
worth twenty years ago?
%. Is not the present value of the
original stock OF the Wilmington &
Weldon Railroad Company. which
constituted the basis of the present
stock of the Atlantic Coast Line. to-
day worth $1,000 or $4,000 in the
market?
20. What dividends are now being
received by the holders of the original
stock of the Wilmington x Weldon
Railroad Company?" (Record p. 294.)
The questions sufficiently disclose
the scope of the proposed enquiry. but
would doubtless have been followed by
other questions eliciting in greater de-
tail the desired information. In its
second exception TO the order of the
commission, the defendant claims the
protection of the Constitution of the
United States in the following words:
The company therefore excerpts tc
the order of the commission in so far
as il is to construed as requiring
it To run an additional train from
Rocky Mount to Selma between the
hours above named. because to do So
would be requiring the company to
perform services without compensation
TO il for the same. and thereby taking
it's property without due process of
law. and in violation of the Constr
tuition of this State, and in violation
of the Constitution of the United
States" (Record p. 32.)
In it's brief the defendant also says;
Neither the commission nor the
Legislature has the power to require
the defendant to run an additional
train at a loss. The jury finds that
Ia operate this train will impose 3
daily loss of SIS upon the defendant;
and to compel the defendant to oDer-
ate this train at a loss would be taking
it's property without compensation and
in violation Of the Constitution of this
State and of the Constitution of the
United States.
In this view of the case the ex-
Guided testimony might become of the
utmost Importance. We cannot pre-
sumo that the Corporation Commission
intends Ito take the property of the
defendant without due process of law, =
or to require unnecessary services
without compensation in some form
or another; but we cannot admit that
the defendant can ignore the just de-
mands of the public by creating for it's
own profit ana convenience a condition
of affairs that makes one train UNI
profitable by throwing all the remun-
eratiVe business on trains that do not
make connection. The order of the
commission does not require the de-
PENDANT to run an additional train.
hut simply TO make connection. 1t
does not necessarily require any addi-
tionaI unusual or special services, but