The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1915-10-04
GAS RATE NOT RAISED


to John NJ. Landon and H ). Lltch-
field. lie ceivers, and they will be sub
ject to such orders and judgments as
the court may subsequently make
No 1. c. Question.
The mere fact that the gas contro-
yersy was taken before the court
which appointed the receivers and had
competent jurisdiction in that action.
the court is not vested with the power
to fix gas rates, says the supreme court
in its opinion. Neither. the court Says,
can the receivers argue the interstate
commerce question, as gas is commin-
gle in the pipe lines to such an extent
as to become Inseparable when iuriS-
diCtion is questioned by the state con-
niissjcners.
Owing to the fact that the % cent
gas rate order of the utilities comriis-
sion was never fully and finally COM
pleted. the court at this time denies
writ Of mandanus. Such action would
have been to recognize and enforce
the commissions order.
No New Rate Fixed.
"A writ of mandamus will not is
sue to enforce ar order of the pub
lie utilities commission before it is
fully, finally and completely made,
says the supreme court. Then 1t
adds: "A writ of mandamus will not
issue to enforce an order of the pub
lie utilities commission fixing rates
for the service rendered by public
utility where the rates fixed are I'M
lust unreasonable or not compenSa-
tory"
that it is the duty of the utilities COM
mission to fix just and compensatory
rates Yet the court does not hold
that the % cent rate order is in TACT
an order that is binding The 20 cent
rate was granted on condition that it
be confirmed by the Missouri COM
mission. which has never taken &C
ton Therefore the court holds that
no new rate was fixed, although the
commission admitted in its findings
the necessity for rate higher than
that of 25 cents allowed prior to the
recent controversy.
Judge F'lannelly could in no in
stance fix rates, the court says He
fixed a 3O-cent rate and it was or
dered placed in effect October 1, put
was blocked under an order from the
supreme court
THAT was not a judicial act" says
the court in referring to Judge F1an-
nellys order. 1T was Legislative and
the legislature has placed the power
to fix the rate with the public utilities
commission. The public utilities law
requires the commission to fix rates
that are just and reasonable. The
constitution of the United States pro-
hibits the commission from fixing
rates that are not compensatory. A
writ of mandamuS will not issue to
force an order of the commission fix
ing rates that are unjust, unreason-
Commission Must Grant 1t.
In other words, the court holds
taht the commission must grant a
rea soaable rate. But the district
court of Montgomery county cannot
take unto itself the power TO estab-
liSh or dictate these rates.
The courts syllabus in part, reads:
"Receivers, properly appointed by a
court of competent Jurisdiction, in
possession of and operating public
utility in this state, are under the con-
troll of the public utilities commission
in the same manner and to the same
extent as the owners of the utility
would be if they were operating the
utility themselves.
1.-THE public utilities commission has
power to fix rates for the service rem
dered by a public utility, although that
utility is being operated by receivers
appointed by a court of competent
jurisdiction.
No /. c. Rights.
at is no part of interstate COM
merce to sell natural gas to the con-
SumerS thereof in this state, where the
gas sold is produced in both Kansas
and Oklahoma and that produced in
Oklahoma, after being commingled in
the pipe lines conveying the same,