The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1904-12-20

nal cost of the construction thereof
and the amount expended in perma-
|nent improvements thereon and the
present compared with the original
cost of construction of all it's property
within the State of North Carolina:
the probable earning capacity of such
property under the particular rates
proposed and the sum required to meet
the operating expenses of such carrier.
person or corporation and all other
facts that will enable them to deter
mine what are reasonable and Just
rates. charges and tariffs
The case of Cottin~ V. Stock Yards
Company, 1873 L. s., 70, is cited by the
defendant; but does not seem to sus-
tain it's contentious In the opinion
in that case appears the following
clear distinction between those corr
porations which. like railroad ana
telegraph companies, are created for
d pubic purpose, and endowed with
certain governmental powers, Such as
that OF eminent domain, and those
corporations which are only incident
ally devoted to public use, receiving
no governmental powers and not I'M
pressed WITH any permanent Iubii'
purpose. The court says on page 93
NOV, in the light of these decisions
and facts, ii is insisted that the same
rule as TO the limit OF judicial inter-
ference must apply in cases in which
a public service is distinctly intended
and rendered and in those in which
without any intent of public service
the owners have placed their property
in such a position that the public has
inf in &c {lhViOnGl
is difference in the conditions OF
these cases. In the one the owner
has Intentionally devoted his property
TO the discharge of public service.
In the other he has placed his prop
erty in such a position that willingly
or unwilling the public has acquired
an interest in its use. In the one
he deliberately undertakes to do that
which is % proper work for the State.
In the other, in pursuit of merely pri-
waite gain, he has placed his property
in such a position that the public mas
become interested in its use. In the
one it may be said that he voluntarily
accepts all the conditions of public SER
vice which attach to like service per-
formed by the State itself In the
other that he submits TO only those
necessary interferences and regula-
tons which the public interests re-
quire. In the one he expresses his
Willingness To do the work of the
State, aware that the State in the dis
charge of its public duties is not guild
ed solely by a question of profit. 1t
may rightfully determine that the
particular service is or such import
ance to the pubic that it may be con-
Quoted at pecuniary loss, having III
view larger general interest. AT any
rate. ii does not perform its services
with the single idea of profit. It's
thought is the general public welfare.
II III such a case an individual is will
ing TO undertake the work of the
State, may it not be urged that he in
la measure subjects himself to the
same rules Of action, and that if the
body which expresses the Judgment
of the State believes that the particu-
lar services should be rendered with
out profit he is not at liberty to COM
plain? While we have said again and
again that one volunteering TO do sucf
services cannot be compelled to expose
his property to confiscation, that ne
cannot be compelled to submit it's use
to such rates as do not pay the ex-
penses of the work, and therefore
create q constantly increasing debt
which ultimately works its appropria-
ton, still is there not force in the sug-
gestion that as the State may do the
work without profit if he voluntarily
submit to a like determination as TO
the paramount interests of the publicr
Again, wherever a purely public use Is
contemplated the State may and gen
orally does bestow upon the party in
tending such use some of its govern
mental powers. 1t grants the right
of eminent domain by which property
can be taken, and taken not at the
price fixed by the owner, but at the
market value. 1t thus enables him
to exercise the powers of the State
and exercising those powers and doing
the work of the State is it wholly UNI
fair to rule that he must submit TO
the same conditions which the State,
may place upon it's own exercise or
the same powers and the doing of the
same work? 1t is unnecessary in this
case to determine this question. we
simply notice the arguments which are
claimed to justify u difference i'm tne
rule as to property devoted to public
uses from that i'm respect to property
used solely for purposes of private
gain, and which only by virtue of me
conditions of its use becomes such as
the pubic have an interest in. In ,ef-
erence to this latter class of cases.
which is alone the subject Of the pres
ent inquiry, ii must be noticed that
the individual is not doing the work
of the State. He is not using his
property in the discharge of a purety
public service. He acquires from the
State none of its governmental pow
ers. His business in all matters of
purchase and sale is subject to the
ordinary conditions of the market and
the freedom of contract"
Miller & Uzzle, III Fayetteville
street, represent the manufacturers
who make the Pianos they sell our
prices will appeal TO you if you want
to buy one on economical basis,
whether Cor cash or time.
Mr.. Mark Squires retires MS editor
of the Lenoir Topic. 4 company has
purchased the paper OF which G.. G.
Weaver is president A. -. Volt
treasurer, and ]. Il. Mattocltg aecre-
tary. 1t vii continue 10 be stead
Easily representative Of all that Is best
in the good county of Caldwell