Schwartzman Service v. Stahl

Decision Date26 July 1932
Docket NumberNo. 465.,465.
Citation60 F.2d 1034
PartiesSCHWARTZMAN SERVICE, Inc., v. STAHL et al.
CourtU.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri

James R. Claiborne (of Bishop & Claiborne), and Burr S. Goodman, both of St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.

Albert Miller, Asst. Atty. Gen. (for Stratton Shartel, Atty. Gen.), D. D. McDonald, Gen. Counsel, of Jefferson City, Mo., and G. C. Murrell, Asst. Counsel for Members of Public Service Commission of Missouri, of Hartville, Mo., for defendants.

Before VAN VALKENBURGH, Circuit Judge, and OTIS and REEVES, District Judges.

REEVES, District Judge.

This case involves the constitutional validity of certain sections of the statutes of Missouri. The particular act assailed relates to "Transportation of persons by motor vehicles over public highways of the State of Missouri."

The original act may be found in article 8 of chapter 33, Revised Statutes of Missouri 1929, but the General Assembly of the state, at its session in 1931 (Laws 1931, p. 304 Mo. St. Ann. §§ 5264-5280), amended said law by repealing the whole of said article 8 and enacting in lieu thereof seventeen new sections, numbered 5264 to 5280, both inclusive. The new article was thereafter designated as article 8, and was intended "for the supervision, regulation and licensing of transportation of persons and property for hire over the public highways of the state of Missouri by motor vehicles; conferring jurisdiction upon the public service commission to license, regulate and supervise such transportation; providing for the enforcement of the provisions of this act and for the punishment for violation thereof."

The legislative enactment defined a "motor vehicle" as "any automobile, automobile truck, motor bus, truck, bus, or any self-propelled vehicle not operated or driven upon fixed rails or tracks."

For all the purposes of this case, said act divided the use of such motor vehicles into two classes; The one designated as "motor carrier," which was given a meaning equivalent to that of a common carrier; and the other designated as a "contract hauler." A contract hauler was defined as "any person, firm or corporation engaged, as his or its principal business, in the transportation for compensation or hire of persons and/or property for a particular person, persons, or corporation to or from a particular place or places under special or individual agreement or agreements and not operating as a common carrier and not operating exclusively within the corporate limits of an incorporated city or town, or exclusively within the corporate limits of such city or town and its suburban territory as herein defined."

"Suburban territory" was defined as "that territory extending one mile beyond the corporate limits of any municipality in this state and one mile additional for each 50,000 population or portion thereof. Provided that when more than one municipality is contained within the limits of any such territory so described, motor carriers operating in and out of any such municipalities within said territory shall be permitted to operate anywhere within the limits of the larger territory so described." Mo. St. Ann. § 5264, subds. a-c, e.

Other definitions and certain regulatory provisions with respect to motor carriers will be omitted. It is sufficient to say that the act contained comprehensive and explicit provisions with reference to "contract haulers" wholly separate and apart from those regulations appertaining to motor carriers. Some provisions were common to both.

Section 5270 specifically applies to contract haulers and clothes the Public Service Commission "with power and authority * * * to license, supervise and regulate every contract hauler in this state except as provided in section 5265 of this act and to fix or approve the rates, fares, charges, classifications, and to prescribe maximum but not minimum scales of rates for general application throughout the state and rules and regulations pertaining thereto; to regulate and supervise the accounts, schedules, service and method of operating of same; to prescribe a uniform system of classification of accounts to be used and after such accounting system shall have been prescribed, contract haulers shall use no other; to require the filing of annual and other reports and any other data; and to supervise and regulate contract haulers in all matters affecting the relationship between such contract haulers, their customers, and the public."

This is followed by a general grant of authority to the Public Service Commission "to prescribe rules and regulations governing all contract haulers." The statute sets out certain specific regulations in the matter of the acceptance of both persons and property for transportation to be incorporated in the regulations of the commission.

Section 5271 imposes upon such contract haulers the duty to obtain permits from the Public Service Commission. This permit is characterized as a "contract hauler permit." The object of such permit is to enable the Public Service Commission to determine the need for such service and the effect of such added transportation facility "upon other transportation service being rendered." All contract haulers are required by said enactment to file an application for a permit in writing; to give information concerning the ownership, financial condition, equipment to be used, and the physical property of the applicant, as well as a statement as to the complete route over which the applicant desires to operate or the territory to be served, and to which shall be added a schedule or schedules of proposed rates.

By section 5274, the Public Service Commission is vested with authority to formulate and promulgate "such safety rules and regulations as it may deem necessary to govern and control the operation of motor carriers or contract haulers over and along the public highways of this state, and the equipment to be used."

The following, among others, are specified by the Legislature to be included in such rules: (a) Motor vehicle shall be safe and sanitary. (b) The driver must be of good moral character, and competent to operate the motor vehicle, and at least 21 years old. (c) Accidents shall be reported to the Public Service Commission. (d) Each vehicle shall be distinctly marked. (e) The speed of such a vehicle shall be limited to forty miles per hour. Penalties are prescribed for a violation of these rules or for the violation of any of the provisions of the act (section 5275), such as failure to obtain permits, etc.

The last section of the act, being section 5280, announces the object of the legislation as follows: "It is hereby declared that the legislation herein contained is enacted for the sole purpose of promoting and conserving the interests and convenience of the public, and that no right, privilege, or permit granted or obtained under or by virtue of this act shall ever be construed as a vested right, privilege, or permit; and the general assembly retains full legislative power over, concerning and pertaining to the subject or subjects legislated upon in this act and the power and right to alter, amend or repeal this act at its pleasure. Provided, the provision of this act shall not apply to trucks of one and one-half ton capacity and less."

As may be observed from the foregoing, the enactment contains certain exemptions from the obligations and duties imposed by the act. These exemptions are found in section 5265, and are as follows: "The provisions of this act shall not apply to any motor vehicle of a carrying capacity of not to exceed five persons, or one ton of freight, when operated under contract with the federal government for carrying the United States mail and when on the trip provided in said contract; nor any motor vehicle owned, controlled or operated as a school bus; nor taxicab, as herein defined; nor to motor vehicles used exclusively in transporting farm and dairy products from the farm or dairy to warehouse, creamery, or other original storage or market; nor to motor vehicles used exclusively in the distribution of newspapers from the publisher to subscribers or distributors."

Alleging that it was a "contract hauler" within the definition of said law, the plaintiff further avers in its bill that an unconstitutional element pervades the whole of said law. It particularly challenges the exemptions provided for in said section 5265, and more specifically the following language contained therein: "Nor to motor vehicles used exclusively in transporting farm and dairy products from the farm or dairy to warehouse, creamery, or other original storage or market."

It is asserted by the plaintiff that said provision impinges upon constitutional guaranties, both state and national.

Affidavits submitted at the hearing disclosed that the state had invested approximately $200,000,000 in its highways, and that the plans for additional highways would in the immediate future involve an outlay of an additional $75,000,000. Moreover, it appeared that the increase of motor vehicles for hire upon the highways of the state had been enormous, and that there was no abatement in such increase; furthermore, that the conditions upon the highways were not only chaotic, but that the unregulated and uncontrolled use of motor vehicles both by common carriers and contract haulers had become a menace not only to the highways themselves, but to the people who traveled thereon. This condition existed at and prior to the enactment of the statutes under observation. In fact the Governor of the state, because of the said chaotic condition upon the highways, specially called the attention of the General Assembly thereto and urged legislative relief.

The Constitution of Missouri (article 5, § 9) devolves upon the Governor, as the chief executive of the state, the duty to give to the General Assembly information relative to the state of the government and to recommend to its consideration such measures...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Mississippi State Tax Commission v. Flora Drug Co
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • May 22, 1933
    ... ... 6982, decided by Supreme ... Court of Montana, December 19, 1932; Schwartzman Service ... v. Stahl, 60 F.2d 1034; State v. Henry, 87 Miss. 125, 40 ... Where a ... ...
  • Ex parte Lockhart
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 5, 1943
    ... ... 42217 shows on its face that by its provisions ... it confers on the Board of Public Service of the City of St ... Louis the power to limit the number of those who may engage ... in the ... are not discriminatory. Schwartsman Serv. Co. v ... Stahl, 60 F.2d 1034; Louis v. Boynton, 53 F ... 473; Ex parte Polite, 97 Tex. Cr. 720, 260 S.W ... ...
  • Park Transp. Co. v. Missouri State Highway Com'n
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 19, 1933
    ... ... D. McDonald, General ... Counsel, and G. C. Murrell, Assistant Counsel, for Public ... Service Commission; Roy McKittrick, Attorney-General, and ... William Orr Sawyers, Assistant ... the Western District of Missouri ( Schwartzman v ... Stahl, 60 F.2d 1034) in an action brought by a contract ... hauler challenging the ... ...
  • State ex rel. Smithco Transport Co. v. Public Service Commission, 22578
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • October 1, 1957
    ...to the consuming market in their raw state or after they have become marketable by incidental processing.'9 See Schwartzman Service v. Stahl, D.C., 60 F.2d 1034, 1037-1038 for a statement of the Governor of Missouri's reasons for requesting the legislature to pass the Missouri Act.10 Appell......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT