THE ,!TTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
Aue-rxiw xl. Tn8xAn
WILL WI JA30N ATTORNRYGkzNERAJ. my 22, 1957
HonorableJ. B. Walling,Chaiman opinionIvo.m-141 CmmmCarriere Camittee Re3 Constitutionality Of House of Representatives SenateBill1CO, as Austin,Teraa emended,relatingto pamenger servioeon Dear &.a Walling8 railroada.
This is in euswer to your requeetfor au opiuionfrau this office as to the coustitutianality of Senate Bill 100. This Bill seeks to emu& Article 6479, veruon'sCivil Statutes,by providing:
"2. It shall be the duty of the C~mnissionto see that upon each railroadin thie State oarryiugpasseugersforhire there shallbe runatlesstone train eaoh &ay,Suu&ays ex- cepte8,upon which passengersshall be hauled;provided,how- ever, the Ccmmissioumay, in its disoretion,upon applioation filed and after notice and hearing,relax such requirement as to auy railroad,or part, portionor braucb thereof,uheu (1) in its opinion,public om~enienoe pentkits of such relax- ation, and ma2 relax such requirementwhen it appearsupon suoh hearing that the ruuuingof one train each bay, Sundays excepted,is not necessaryin the renditionof adequate8er- vice to the public;or (2) that on auy railroad,or pmt, or portionor brauoh thereof,passengerserviceas frequeutas one train each day, Sundaysexcepted,with the passenger trafficofferedand reasonablytobe expeoted,doesnot and will not pay the cost of such serviceplus a reasonablere- turu upon the propertyemployediu the renditionof such servicej provided,however,that publicconvenienceshall always be a superiorconsiderationin detenuiuiugwhetheror not the requireukentof nmuiug at least one paesengertrain a day may be relaxed;. . .*
The portim of Article 6479 sought to be amendedpro~idesn
"2. It shall be the duty of the Caomission to see that upon eaahrailroad in this State carryingpassengersforhire there shallbe nm atleastone train each day,Sundaye ex- cepted,upon which passengersshall be haul&j provided,how- ever, the C~nmiasionmay, in its diecretion,upon application filed and after notice an8 hearing,relax such requirement as to auy railroad,or part, portionor bran& thereof,when, in its opinion,public conveniencepermitsof such relaxation, . .
_ .I
HonorableJ. B. Walling,Page 2 (WW-141)
and shall relax such requirementwhen it appearsupou suoh hearing that the ruuuiugof oue train each day, Sundays excepted,is not necessaryin the renditionof adequate serviceto the public,or that on any railroad,or part, or portionor branoh thereof,passengerserviceas fre- quent as one train each day, Sundays excepted,with the passengertrafficofferedand reasonablyto be expected, doss not and will not pay the cost of such serviceplus a reasonablereturnupon the propertyemployedin the ren- ditionof such service;D 0 +*
Under the proposedmuendnentthe RailroadCcmmissionis author- ized,but not required,,torelax the requirementof rmming at least one train each day, Sundaysexcepted,in two situations: (1) where public oonveniencepermiteor where such service,isnot necessaryin the rendi- tion of adequateserviceto the public,and (2) where the passengertraffic does no.t.:xld will not pay the cost of such serviceplus a reasonablereturn.
The constitutionalproblemstems frcpnthe provisoto the seoond situationprovidingthat public convenienceshall alwaysbe a superior considerationin determiningwhether or not the requirementof runningat least one passengertrain a day may be relaxed. This pro~isicmis most Bmbiguotla,however,we interpretit to mean that when the Cauaisaionfinds that pablioconveniencerequiresthe contiuuedservice,but that the cost of such servicewill not pay for itself,the Ccmmissicmmust give greater weight to the publicconveniencein determiningwhether it should permit the relaxationof ths one train a day requirement. Such a provisiondoes not renderSenateBill 100 unconstitutional on its face.
The railroadsin