Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1921-07-28

the municipal authorities and sub
scribers.
Upon consideration of the act and
its context, under this proviso it ap-
pears to the court that this proviso
twas intended to refer to franchises
and contracts already granted at
the time of the passage of the act,
lin 1904, and not to franchises and
contracts, granted and made subse-
quent to that date; and as the fran
chise and agreement in the present
case were granted and made in 1916,
they were subject to the general pro-
visions of Section 3161, without ref
erence to this proviso.
In the year 1921 the railroad COM
mission of South Carolina on the
24th of March, made a change in
these rates and tolls, by increasing
them.
The complainant who was n of
the subscribers to the original agree
ment made in 1916, between the town
of Huntsville and the defendant, has
now brought the bill to order to en-
|ioin the defendant from charging the
increased rates and tolls allowed by
the railroad commission, upon the
ground that the contract made be-
tween the town of Huntsville and the
Southern Bell Telephone & Tele-
graph Co., and the subscribers to the
telephone exchange is still of force
and binding, and that the railroad
commission had no authority to au-
thorize the enhanced tolls.
The supreme court of the United
States has lately announced the rule
to be that where a public service. cor
%poration and a municipal corporation
having power to contract as to rates
and exert that power by fixing plans
to govern during a particular time,
enter into a contract fixing rates, the
enforcement of such rates is control
led by the obligation resulting from
the contract; and even although such
rates may be confiscatory, the public
service corporation would not be JUS
titled in refusing to carry out this
contract; but having entered into a
contract and agreement they must
perform it.
General Rule.
This, however, does not affect the
general rule; that from the stand
point of the public the legislature
may prescribe for the purpose OF
preventing discrimination and favor
itism or oppression, that the rates
to be charged by the public service
corporation shall be as fixed by some,
governmental agency, sucheas in the.
case, the railroad commission.
If this were a suit between the
town of Huntsville and the Southern
Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co., or
between any of the subscribers, at
the date of the contract with the
Southern Bell Telephone G. Tele-
graph Co., ~uninterfered with by any
action to fix the rates, the court
would without hesitation hold that
the Southern Bell Telephone & Tele-
graph Co., was bound to perform the
services and for their performance
limited to charge the contract rates
mentioned in the agreement; al
though in effect such contract rates
might lead Ito loss of a ruinous or
confiscatory character.
That is not the question here. The
question here is whether or not the
general law of the state existing at
the time did not enter into the COR
tract made between the town of
Huntsville and the Southern Bell
Telephone & Telegraph Co., and the
subscribers in 1916, so as to make
it an element in that contract, that
Notwithstanding the agreemen of par
ties between themselves, it was sub
ject to the right of the government
in the exertion of its general power
for the protection of the public, and
the maintenance of service necessary
or essential to. the public to charge
the rates fixed by the contract. In
the opinion of this court, such would
seem to be the effect of the decision
of the supreme court; and it appear
ing in this case that the railroad com
mission of South Carolina, after no.
tice and hearing in the general man.