The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1906-01-05
Railway Board Jurisdiction Over
Electric Lines Questioned.
Question Is Argued Before the
Supreme Court.
ORIENT COMPLICATION.
Right to Cross Outer Belt Tracks
in Kansas City.
Does Use of Electricity Place
Company Beyond Reach.

IL IS now up to the supreme court 10
decide whether or not the state board
OF railroad commissioners has authority
over the suburban electric lines of the
state The question was presented to
the court Thursday afternoon in the
case of the Kansas City Outer Belt
against the state board of railroad COM
missioners and the Kansas City West
ern, the latter being the name Of the
Kansas City terminus of the Leaven-
worth electric line.
The Outer Belt, which is the terminus
of the Mexico q Orient line, wants the
right to cross the Kansas City Western
on grade. The Kansas City western Of
fered to allow the Orient to- put in an
overhead crossing for the use of the
electric line, but the Orient insisted that
it was entitled to a grade crossing. Tha
Orient thereupon applied to the board
OF railroad commissioners for an order
to compel the Kansas City Western to
permit the crossing. The board of rail-
road commissioners looked the ground
over, and decided that they had no juris-
dictiOn over the controversy, as the
Kansas City Western is an electric line.
Then the Orient started mandamus
proceedings to compel the railroad COM
missioners to assume jurisdiction. The
fight is really between the two railroad
nissioneTs was not represented At the
argument of the case yesterday.
The Outer Belt, or Orient, was repre-
sented at the argument yesterday by
Henry L. Alden, and the Kansas City
| Western by c. F. Hutchings.
Mr.. Hutchings argued at length that
the law does not give the board of rail-
road commissioners any authority what
/ ever over electric lines; that the whole
intent of the law is to limit the authori-
ty of the board to lines operated by
steam.
Then do you mean to say" asked
Judge Henry Mason from the bench
that if the railroads of the state should
adopt the use of electricity as motive
power, the board of railroad commits
sioners would thereby lose jurisdiction
over them?'
Hutchings, "for in my opinion the
courts would consider the intent Of the
would not allow subsequent develop
ments to alter the intent.
/ Mr.. Hutchings took the existing laws
! governing the board of railroad com
missioners, and pointed out passages
which showed that the people VINO
drafted the law were evidently not think
/ ing much about street railroads when
| they enacted the law.
Section p he said, expressly limits
! the Jurisdiction of the commissioners
| operated by steam.
| s'Section 12 provides for the construc-
/ ton of switch tracks by private persons
| and connect them with any railroad a.
/ ready constructed VIII it be contend
| ed that the legislature intended TO per
nit individuals to connect switch tracks
with street or interurban lines?
Section 13 provides for the connection
/ of railroads so that they may inter-
change cars. Can it be contended tnar
the legislature intended to connect rail-
roads operated by steam with electllc
railroads operated by overhead tro1teSs-
ssThe law provides that no railroad
company shall charge more than three
cents per mile. This can not possibly
apDly to street railways which stop az
| every crossing and receive hNe cents
from each passenger fegaIolsss VI Ni9
| tance Travelled.
LAS a general proposition, statutes re-
Iating TO railroads generally do not ap-
ply to street railroads.
Net Street Railway.
The principal contention of the Orient
| Outer Belt in the case is that the kan
sas City Western is not a street ral-
way; that it is simply the new name
for the Kansas ity-LeayenWorth eiec-
trio line and is under It's CHARTER aull-
orized to use steam for motive power II
Mr.. Alden, arguing the case for the
Outer Belt, said:
sense a street railway. At the point OF
crossing desired, and for long DIS
tance on either side of said point. It as
not upon any street or public highway
tt is constructed through the country
over its own right of way. for a iargs
portion of the distance between kansas
Citv and Leavenworth, in the same
manner as other railways. II is opera
fed for both passengers and freight ana
has all the rights privileges ana i'm
munities of all railroad companies.
Mr.. Alden claimed that the supreme
court has held that the lola eleclllc
railway is fbaIe for stock killed on its
right of way under the provision Of the
law relating to railroad liability IN gen
eral thus placing electric railroads III
! the same class with steam railroads
/ MI. Alden also held that the proper tn-
/ terpretation of the railroad law shows
/ that the board has jurisdiction over
! common carriers of all kinds, regardless
of whether they use steam or electricity
/ for motive power.