Case Name: GULF, C. & S. F. RY. CO. v. STATE
Court: Supreme Court of Texas
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1916-01-12
Citations: 181 S.W. 685
Docket Number: No. 9055
Parties: GULF, C. & S. F. RY. CO. v. STATE.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 181
Pages: 685–685

Head Matter:
GULF, C. & S. F. RY. CO. v. STATE.
(No. 9055.)
(Supreme Court of Texas.
Jan. 12, 1916.)
ComusRce <&wkey;58 — Interstate Commerce — Interference by State — Stopping Trains at County Seat.
The state under Rev. St. 1911, art. 6676, authorizing the Railroad Commission to order railroads engaged in interstate commerce to stop through trains at county seat stations, may require the stoppage of interstate trains at a county seat within its limits, where the carrier has not otherwise provided sufficient railway facilities for it.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Commerce, Cent. Dig. §§ 77-86, 100; Dec. Dig. <&wkey;>58.)
Error from Court of Civil Appeals of Third Supreme Judicial District.
Suit by the State of Texas against the Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fé Railway Company. From a judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals (169 S. W. 385), affirming a judgment for the plaintiff, the defendant petitions for a writ of error.
Writ refused.
Terry, Cavin & Mills, of Galveston, and A. H. Culwell, of Galveston, for plaintiff in error.

Opinion:
PHILLIPS, C. J.
The case concerns an order of the Railroad Commission, issued under the authority of article 6676, «Revised Statutes, directing the plaintiff in error to stop certain of its trains at Meridian, the county seat of Bosque county, for a time sufficient to receive and let off passengers with safety, for the violation of which, at the suit of the state, penalties were adjudged against the company, such judgment being affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals. 169 S. W. 385.
Conceding that the trains in question were interstate trains, it was found by the trial court, with the finding approved by the Court of Civil Appeals, that, independent of these trains, the railway facilities provided by the company for the service of the citizens of Meridian were not adequate. We are unable to say as a matter of law that that conclusion was unwarranted. The ease, therefore, falls within the established holding that the state may require the stoppage of interstate trains at a particular locality within its limits, where the carrier has not otherwise provided proper and sufficient railway facilities for it.
The writ of error is refused.