Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Public Service Commission
Citation | 192 S.W. 460 |
Decision Date | 13 February 1917 |
Docket Number | No. 19705.,19705. |
Parties | ATCHISON, T. & S. F. RY. CO. et al. v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF MISSOURI et al. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Cole County; J. G. Slate, Judge.
Complaint by John M. Dean, for himself and others, against the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fé Railway Company and others. From an order of the Public Service Commission in favor of complainants, defendants took the complaint by petition for review to the circuit court, and from its judgment affirming the order, the defendants appeal. Order set aside and vacated, and cause remanded.
Thomas R. Morrow, of Kansas City, for appellant Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. F. S. Hudson, of Kansas City, for appellant Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. O. M. Spencer and H. J. Nelson, both of St. Joseph, for appellant Chicago, B. & Q. Ry. Co. Paul E. Walker, of Topeka, Kan., for appellants Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. and J. M. Dickinson, its receiver. S. W. Moore and J. M. Souby, both of Kansas City, for appellant Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. J. G. Trimble, of Kansas City, for appellant Quincy, O. & K. C. Ry. Co. J. M. Bryson and J. W. Jamison, both of St. Louis, for appellant Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. J. B. Daniel, of Piedmont, for appellant Missouri Southern Ry. Co. E. A. Haid, of St. Louis, for appellant St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. W. F. Evans and E. T. Miller, both of St. Louis, for appellant St. Louis & S. F. R. R. Co. Scarritt, Scarritt, Jones & Miller, of Kansas City, for appellant Chicago & A. R. R. Co. J. L. Minnis and N. S. Brown, both of St. Louis, for appellant Wabash Ry. Co. E. J. White, H. H. Larimore, and J. F. Green, all of St. Louis, for appellants Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. and St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co. Alex. Z. Patterson, General Counsel, and James D. Lindsay, Assistant Counsel, of Public Service Commission, both of Jefferson City, for respondents.
I. John M. Dean, on behalf of himself and other traveling salesmen, made complaint to the Public Service Commission that certain regulations adopted by the railroads of this state in reference to the storage of baggage remaining more than 24 hours after reaching its destination, was unjust in its application to the baggage of persons following the calling of complainants. The regulations complained of are, to wit:
The defendant railroad companies filed answers substantially alike, to the general effect that their regulations covering the storage of undelivered baggage are reasonable and have been in general use for many years in the United States, without objection on the part of the general public; that the baggage rooms used in connection with their business are of limited capacity, and would be overcrowded if travelers should not promptly remove their baggage after reaching its destination, concluding their answers, to wit:
"And these defendants aver that the extension of their storage time for baggage in compliance with the request of complainants in this cause would be a discrimination in favor of a portion of the traveling public and against interstate travelers, and such privilege and discrimination would be invalid and unauthorized."
On the hearing before the Commission certain traveling salesmen testified to the effect that when they arrived just before Saturday, or on a holiday, in certain towns, they found it inconvenient to get the local merchants to examine their samples, because Saturday was generally their busiest day, wherefore they desired the railroads should alter their regulations, so as to allow an additional free storage for 24 hours in such cases. The Commission sustained the complaint of the traveling salesmen, making its finding and order in the following terms:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Public Service Commission
...complete justice in the premises. State ex rel. Wabash Ry. Cc. v. Pub. Serv. Corn., 271 Mo. 155, 196 S. W. 369; A. T. & G. Y. Ry. Co. v. Pub. Serv. Corn. (Mo.) 192 S. W. 460; Lusk v. Atkinson, 268 Mo. 139, 186 S. W. 703; Int. Cora. Com. v. III. Cent., 215 U. S. loc. cit. 470, 30 Sup. Ct. 15......
-
State ex rel. Consumers Pub. Serv. V. Pub. Serv. Comm., 38680.
...for that purpose. [Sec. 5685; Lusk v. Atkinson, 268 Mo. 109, 186 S.W. 703; Atchison, T. & S.F.R. Co. v. Public Service Comm. (Mo. Sup.), 192 S.W. 460; State ex rel. Laundry, Inc., v. Public Service Comm., 327 Mo. 93, 34 S.W. (2d) 37.] Moreover, its orders are made on the basis of what is in......
- The State ex rel. Kansas City Terminal Railway Co. v. Public Service Commission of State
- Public Service Commission of Missouri v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company