Ft. Smith & W. Ry. Co. v. State

• Decision Date: 08 March 1910
• Citation: 108 P. 407,25 Okla. 866,1910 OK 72
• Parties: FT. SMITH & W. RY. CO. et al. v. STATE.
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

108 P. 407

25 Okla. 866, 1910 OK 72

FT. SMITH & W. RY. CO. et al. v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

March 8, 1910

Syllabus by the Court.

Where an order of the Corporation Commission is assailed on an appeal solely upon the ground that there was not sufficient evidence before the commission to entitle the order to the prima facie presumption of being reasonable, just, and correct, obtaining by reason of section 22, art. 9, of the Constitution, if there is any evidence reasonably tending to support the findings of fact and the order of the commission its order will not be disturbed.

Appeal from the Corporation Commission of Oklahoma.

Action by the State against the Fort Smith & Western Railway Company and others. From an order of the Corporation Commission fixing a schedule of rates, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Clifford L. Jackson, S. T. Bledsoe, C. O. Blake, and Edgar A. De Meules, for appellants.

Chas West, Atty. Gen., and Geo. A. Henshaw, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

HAYES J.

This case is an appeal from an order of the Corporation Commission promulgating a schedule of rates to be observed by all railroads operating in this state in making charges on shipments of goatskins, hides, sheep pelts, green or dry between all stations in the state. The order was made by the commission after publication of notice thereof and after hearing had thereon. The commission has made and filed in the case its findings of fact and a full and clear statement of the reasons upon which it bases the order. The evidence establishes that hides are usually purchased in small quantities throughout a state, and shipped locally to some concentrating point, where they are assorted and classified and each particular class or kind shipped in carload lots to that point in the market that consumes that particular quality or kind of hides. The commission finds, and the evidence tends to establish, that the local rates heretofore prevailing on hides in this state have been so high as to prevent the concentration of hides at any point in the state where they may be assorted and classified, and then shipped to that market which consumes that particular quality of hides; and the jobbers throughout the state are compelled, by reason of the high local rates, to ship the hides direct to Kansas City, where they are assorted and classified and shipped to St. Louis, Chicago, and other places where a market exists. That on account of said high rates it is practically impossible to establish a concentrating point within the state, as result of which there is a discrimination against the dealers in hides in this state. The schedule of rates proposed by the order is a reduction upon the rates heretofore existing. The commission finds the rates heretofore existing unreasonable and unjust and the proposed rates to be reasonable. The only argument made by counsel for appellants in their brief against the incorrectness of the order of the commission is: "There is nothing in the evidence in this case that justifies the theory of the presumption that this order is reasonable, just, and correct. There is an entire want of evidence upon which to base the order. The presumption that the Constitution raises in support of this order is based upon the evidence, and upon nothing else, and if the evidence will not support it then clearly the Constitution does not intend that the presumption shall exist."

In M., K. & T. Ry. Co. v. State, 103 P. 613, it it held "On appeal from an order of the Corporation Commission, the presumption obtains, by reason of section 22, art. 9, of the Constitution, that...