Fielder v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas

• Decision Date: 24 June 1898
• Citation: 46 S.W. 633
• Parties: FIELDER v. MISSOURI, K. & T. RY. CO. OF TEXAS.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

46 S.W. 633

FIELDER v. MISSOURI, K. & T. RY. CO. OF TEXAS.

Supreme Court of Texas.

June 24, 1898.

Error to court of civil appeals of Third supreme judicial district.

Action by B. L. Fielder against the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company of Texas. There was a judgment for plaintiff, which was affirmed by the court of civil appeals (42 S. W. 362), and he brings error. Affirmed.

A. L. Beaty and A. H. Culver, for plaintiff in error. T. S. Miller and Head, Dillard & Muse, for defendant in error.

GAINES, C. J.

This case, as made by the amended petition upon which it was tried, was a suit by the plaintiff in error to recover of defendant in error actual damages and penalties under section 15 of the act of April 3, 1891, to establish a railroad commission. The case made by the pleadings and evidence is that the plaintiff and one Arnoldi were competitors in the business of selling coal in the city of Sherman; that they received their supplies by shipments over the defendant's road from the Indian Territory; that there was a spur track from the depot of the company to the coal bins of each of them; and that, while the defendant carried Arnoldi's coal over the spur track to his bin, it refused to extend the same accommodation to the plaintiff. The plaintiff recovered a judgment for actual damages, but the court denied him a recovery for the penalties. He appealed from the judgment, and it was affirmed by the court of civil appeals. Having brought the case to this court, he complains of the ruling of the trial court and of the court of civil appeals in holding that he was not entitled to recover the penalties claimed in his petition. The provisions of the statute under which this proceeding was instituted are now found in the Revised Statutes of 1895, and are as follows:

"Art. 4574. * * * 1. It shall also be an unjust discrimination for any such railroad to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, company, firm, corporation or locality, or to subject any particular description of traffic to any undue or unreasonable prejudice, delay or disadvantage in any respect whatsoever. * * * 4. Any railroad company violating any provision of this article shall be deemed guilty of unjust discrimination, and shall for each offense pay to the state of Texas a penalty of not less than five hundred dollars nor more than five thousand dollars.

"Art. 4575. In case any railroad subject to this chapter shall do, cause to be done, or permit to be done any matter, act or thing in this chapter prohibited or declared to be unlawful, or shall omit to do any act, matter or thing herein required to be done by it, such railroad shall be liable to the person or persons, firm or corporation injured thereby for the damages sustained in consequence of such violation; and in case said railroad company shall be guilty of extortion or discrimination as by this chapter defined, then, in addition to such damages, such railroad shall pay to the person, firm or corporation injured thereby a penalty of not less than one hundred and twenty-five dollars nor more than five hundred dollars, to be recovered in any court of competent jurisdiction in any county into or through which such railroad may run. * * *"

The question is, do the provisions quoted apply to the case made by the plaintiff? The power to regulate commerce between the states is delegated by the constitution of the United States to congress, and it was, with some minor exceptions, thereby wholly denied...