Imperial Valley press., 1913-01-17
BATTLE ROYAL IS ON OVER
RECENT 1HAYER DECISION

interest the ''battle royal thus out
lined in the Los Angeles Tribune this
morning:
The state utilities commission is to
carry the war to the supreme court OF
California over the question of just
what constitutes a public service cor
roraiion, if the case Just filed with the
commission by property owners in the
Imperial valley is carried to The con-
cluSiOn that seems inevitable. The su
preme court, it will be remembered
decided in the sO-calIed Thayer case a
month ago that the California Devel
Opment company, carrying water from
the Colorado river to the valley, was
not public service corporation, or a
common carrier of water. because 1t
had not chosen to 50 designate itself,
end because it served q. subsidiary cor
pOration. which in turn served con-
Sumers The state railroad commits
sion, with attorneys generally, be-
lieved that the wording of the decision
was such that the same principles of
law laid down in this decision might
be carried farther and made to apply
tC public service companies generally.
The railroad commissioners declared
unofficially and privately that they in
tended to make the supreme court rule
on every separate case in this same
fashion. In other words, the members
said they would force the supreme
court to decide every single case sep
arately. In this way they hoped, it is
believed, to place the supreme court in
an untenable position and eventually to
force withdrawal Of the principle de-
clared in the Thayer case.
Now come property owners Of Holt
willie with a petition to the state rail
road commission asking that it imme-
dialely proceed to fix rates for the
California Development company,
claiming that The corporation is amen
able to The state commission. the su-
preme court to the contrary nOtWith
standing, and asserting, as a reason for
the petition thai IIoltville is being
charged 81 an acre foot. when other
consumers in the valley of the same
class pay but 80 cents an acre foot.
This petition has gone to the railroad
commission and a hearing will be ar
ranged shortly.
AT that time il is probable that all
the facts in the record i'll the Thayer
case will be put into the railroad COM
llIlSSlplI = lfIplu, titFI iilt toiii-
mission will be in a position to decide
on the specific case with which the
supreme court dealt. If the commits
sioners believe that they have jurisdic-
tiOn their record in the past would in
dicate that they will say so, and at
least attempt to enforce their findings.
If they do this they will be immedi-
ately confronting The supreme court
in a legal battle royal. The very fact
that the first case since The decision
Of the Thayer question concerns the
same corporation involved in that mai
ter will add interest to the contest and
should enliven the conflict, It is not
unlikely that the decision Of the com
mission will be appealed to the su-
prcme court. if the former decides that
the corporation is a common carrier.
and this will give opportunity for a
direct. first hand, and probably bitter
legal fight between the two state jul
dicial bodies.
On thai occasion. since the Thayer
case has brought the attitude of the
supreme court to such wide public no
ticc, the opinions and sentiments of the
people of the state may be brought to
the attention of The supreme court and
the struggle. instead of being waged
by an obscure and little known land
owner in the Imperial valley, will be
waged between The most powerful
state commission of California and the
supreme court.
Attorneys for Mr.. Thayer attempted
to force the California Development
company to deliver him water from
its main canal, without the mediation
or agency of third party-One of the
mutual water companies of the district.
They represented thai the development
company carried water to others in the
valley and sold it for irrigation, claimed
that the company was common car
rier. and demanded water deliveries as
a right. The court held that the Cal
ifornia Development company had new
er declared itself to be common car
rier, but had StudiOuSly avoided, in its
bylaws, constitution. regulations and
rules, any such admission, and on the
other hand that it had always brought
water to the valley for distribution by
a second agency-the mutual water
therefore that the company was not d
public service corporation.
While this decision jeOpardized many
interests in the valley its significance
would not have been general had it
not been for the fact that attorneys
generally agreed that the court had so
wOrded its decision as to make it ap-
plicable to hundreds of other corpora
tions carrying or delivering cOmmOdi-
ties or service TO secondary or auxiliary
companies for distribution to the con-
sumer. This view Of the Lewiston was
truly alarming, and the railroad COM
missioners were quoted as saying that
| it virtually negatived the potency of
the state public utilities act under
which the commission operates.
War was declared then, an0 now it
seems likely that the first pitched bat
tie is imminent.