Court Opinion

ID: 6859436
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-23 20:46:30.493812+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:05:13.194003
License: Public Domain

HITZ, Associate Justice (concurring).
I concur in the judgment of the court in this case, but not in all the far-reaching statements and implications of the opinion.
It seems to me clear that the Interstate Commerce Commission took jurisdiction of the questions presented; considered them at length; and decided them by a much divided vote, from which decision so reached no writ of mandamus lies to require a contrary decision.
But the opinion of the court asserts that the contract seriously impairs the ability of the smaller roads to operate their properties satisfactorily, and I feel constrained to dissent from the view — though based on the ordinance for the Northwest Territory -and the other authorities cited — that a common carrier subject to the provisions of these statutes may contract itself out of the power of the Commission by an arrangement involving so much of its revenue and covering so long a time as to impair or destroy its power to perform its public obligations.