White Pine news weekly mining review. [volume] (East Ely, Nev.) 1910-1920, 1919-08-24

C. & o. Railroad VS.. West Virginia.
242, u. S. Reports SOB. and Related
Cases.
These fundamental principles are
relied upon in this proceeding and
their proper applications are ably
presented by Chief Justice within the
North Carolina Train Service Case
eos, u. s., Page 1, and in the Kan
sas Case 2I6. u. s. Page 262. where-
in the Court held that the cases did
not involve:
The enforcement by a state o. a
general scheme of maximum rules.
but only whether an exercise of state
authority to compel a carrier To per-
form a particular and specified duty
Is so inherently unjust and nnreason-
able as to amount to the depr. yation
of property without the due process
of law"
After noting that the operation of
the extended train service i'll the
aforesaid states would be rendered
at a substantial loss. in operating ex-
penses, the court said:
The distinction between an order
relating to a matter OF service, and
an order affixing rates is SO because
the primal duty of a carrier is to fur
nish adequate service tn the public,
and that duty may we'll be compelled
although by doing so rs an incident
some peeuniaTy loss from rendering
such service may result. IL follows
therefore. that the mere mourning of
a loss from the performance of such
a duty does not in and of itself neces-
sarily give rise TO the conclusion of
unreasonableness. and would be the
Ease where a whole scheme of states
was unreasonable under the doctrine
of Smyth VS.. Amos. As the duty 10
furnish necessary facilities Is eoter-
minous with the powers of the cor
poration, the obligation to discharge
that duty must be considered in con-
nection with the nature and product
iseness OF the corporate business as
a whole the contractor of The services
required, and the public need for its
performance"
In the matter OF requiring a rail
road ~ ranIar an auoaptfa1 mr. an IN
dispensable train service for the pub
lie necessity and convenience. the
Court has held that 30 long as the
carrier operations of the railroad are
profitable as a whole. incidental loss
due TO various causes shall not be
seriously considered as justify ing a
denial to the public Of the service
which the railroad is chartered 10
perform.
The Nevada Northern Railway
company has made an aggregate in
vestment In railroad property
amounting TO three million seven
hundred thousand dollars since the
beginning of it's operation from nine
teen hundred six to December thirty
first. nineteen hundred eighteen.
whereas the net earnings which have
l.en made from its common carrier
business throughout that period
amount 20 nine million lime hundred
THOUSAND dollars, or a. aftereharge
of eight b, ndred an twenty-five
Thousand collars per snnum. Over
and above all operating exrcrses and
taxes. or stated diferai..g the rail-
way company has paid itself out two
an1 one ali times.
While a very large percentage of
these earnings have come from h
movement of an allied industrial
company's ores. in large volume from
the mines TO the smelters. they are
unqualifiedly common carrier rail-
way ernings. and come within the
definition covering the business as a
whole announced by the United
States Supreme Court in the afore-
said cases.
While there is a serious suspension
OF industrial operations within the
Ely district. it may In the light of ex-
perience be treated as temporary. No
good or sufficient reaso has been
shown why train service should be
denied to the eight thousand or ten
thousand people who reside in the
ely District. and who are vitality de
pendent upon the service In question.
The issue presented between the
eontending parties. namely. the Rail-
way company on the one hand. and
the striking shop employees on the
other. amounts to a difference of only
twenty-five dollars per day on the
basis OF the wages offered and de-
manded. covering the 1875 employees
in question, and therefore. this