People ex rel. Cantrell v. St. Louis, A.&T.H.R. Co.

• Decision Date: 21 December 1898
• Citation: 176 Ill. 512,52 N.E. 292
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court
• Parties: PEOPLE et rel. CANTRELL v. ST. LOUIS, A. & T. H. R. CO.

176 Ill. 512

52 N.E. 292

PEOPLE et rel. CANTRELL

v.ST. LOUIS, A. & T. H. R. CO.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Dec. 21, 1898.

Appeal from circuit court, Franklin county; A. K. Vickers, Judge.

Mandamus, on relation of William S. Cantrell, against the St. Louis, Alton & Terre Haute Railroad Company. From a judgment denying the writ, the relator appeals. Reversed.Maurice T. Moloney, Atty. Gen., H. J. Hamlin, A. W. Q'Hara, T. J. Scofield, and M. L. Newell, for appellant.

F. M. Youngblood and John H. Mulkey, for appellee.

This is a petition for a writ of mandamus in its amended form, presented in the name of the people of the state of Illinois, at the relation of William S. Cantrell, a citizen and property owner of Benton, Franklin county, Ill., as a patron of the defendant railroad company, the prayer of which petition is as followes: ‘That a writ of mandamus be issued, directed to the St. Louis, Alton & Terre Haute Railroad Company, commanding it to cause to be furnished, placed, run, and operated on said railroad, extending from Eldorado to Duquoin, a daily (Sundays excepted) passenger train, each way, suitable and sufficient to carry all passengers, with their necessary baggage, in comfortable and reasonable security, and at a reasonable speed, and to operate said line of railroad from East St. Louis to Eldorado as a continuous line, and that, upon final hearing hereof, such further order be made in the premises as to the court shall seem meet and proper.’ The petition was answered by the respondent railroad company. A replication was filed to the answer, except as to one paragraph thereof, which was demurred to, and the demurrer sustained. A jury was waived, and the cause was submitted by agreement for trial before the circuit judge without a jury. The trial judge rendered judgment refusing the prayer of the petition, and dismissing the same, from which judgment the present appeal is prosecuted.

A large amount of testimony, oral and documentary, was introduced upon the hearing, including reports of the respondent company to the railroad and warehouse commissioners, the charter of the Belleville & Eldorado Railroad Company, as found on pages 485, 486, and 487 of the Private Laws of 1861, and the lease executed by the Belleville & Eldorado Railroad Company to the respondent in 1880. The petition avers that the railroad of the Belleville & Eldorado Railroad Company is the only railroad in Franklin county, and also contains the following averments: ‘That on or about December 1, 1893, numerous citizens of said towns of Benton, Eldorado, Christopher, Mulkeytown, Thompsonville, and other towns along said line of railroad, presented petitions to the said railroad and warehouse commission of the state of Illinois, complainingof the train service on said railroad extending from Eldorado to Duquoin, and setting forth the alleged facts relating thereto, and asking the said commission to take cognizance of their complaint, and by appropriate order or orders, or by appropriate suit or suits, compel the said St. Louis, Alton & Terre Haute Railroad Company to run its trains through from St. Louis to Eldorado as one continuous line, and run a daily through passenger train, with appropriate connections with other trains at Duquoin and Eldorado, and give the public such further relief in the way of train service on said railroad as justice and right demand. That thereupon said commission gave notice to said railroad company of the presentation of said petition, and such action was thereupon afterwards taken and had by said commission that on January 9 and 10, 1894, a hearing was had at Benton on said petition, at which time and place said railroad company was present and represented by its president, Hon. George W. Parker, and its counsel, F. M. Youngblood, and the said petitioners were represented by Hons C. H. Layman and D. R. Webb; and thereupon, after hearing and considering the evidence introduced by the petitioners and the said company, the said commission made and promulgated the following order or recommendation in the premises, to wit: ‘We therefore recommend to you, the St. Louis, Alton and Terre Haute Railroad Company, that you, without delay, cause to be placed and operated on the Belleville and Eldorado Division of your road, in addition to the mixed train now being operated by you on said line, a daily passenger train, suitable and sufficient to carry all passengers, with their necessary baggage, in comfort and security, and at a reasonable speed, and that you operate your said railroad from East St. Louis to Eldorado as a continuous line, so that persons desiring to leave Eldorado and intermediate points in the morning of each day (Sundays excepted) may be able to go on said railroad to East St. Louis and return the same day.’ That said St. Louis, Alton & Terre Haute Railroad Company has wholly neglected to comply with the said order or follow said recommendation, but, on the contrary, refuses to comply therewith, and yet continues to run its said train as before, and still fails to accommodate the traveling public.' Such other facts, set up in the pleadings and developed by the proofs, as are necessary to an understanding of the questions involved, are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

MAGRUDER, J. (after stating the facts).

The main question in this case is whether a railroad company can be compelled by mandamus to run a passenger train. The appellee operates about 50 miles of railroad running from Duquoin easterly to Eldorado, which it leased in 1880 for 985 years, from the Belleville & Eldorado Railroad Company; and it is conceded that it runs no passenger train-that is, no train for passenger service exclusively-over this distance of 50 miles between Duquoin and Eldorado. On Sunday and Monday evenings, a train, consisting of a baggage car and one passenger coach, runs from Duquoin easterly to Benton about 18 miles, returning from Benton to Duquoin the next morning about 4 o'clock; but the only train which runs the whole length of the branch road between Duquoin and Eldorado is what is called a ‘mixed train,’ consisting of coal, stock, and freight cars, to which are attached a combination car and passenger coach. This mixed train leaves Duquoin daily at 11 o'clock a. m. for Eldorado, and, returning in the afternoon, arrives at Duquoin at 7:10 p. m. Appellee runs through trains from St. Louis, by way of Belleville, to Duquoin; but the mixed train in question does not cannect at Duquoin with any of the passenger trains run by appellee from Duquoin to St. Louis, nor at Eldorado with any of the trains upon the Cairo Division of the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad, or the Shawneetown Branch of the Louisville & Nashville Railroad. Passengers for St. Louis or points west of Duquoin must remain over night at Duquoin, and take the train next morning, at 4:50 o'clock. This mixed train carries freight, express, baggage, stock, mail, and passengers. On account of the freight carried and handled, it is a slow train, being often behind its schedule time from 20 minutes to 3 hours. During the busy shipping season, it often has to be cut in two on the grades, one part going forward to a switch, and returning for the balance of the train, including the passenger coach. At Eldorado the entire train is often pushed in front of the engine down to the depot. When the mixed train goes east, the passenger coach, which is used by all classes of passengers, both ladies and gentlemen,is between the freight cars and the combination coach. The mixed train has two brakemen, is operated by hand brakes, and has no air brakes. The regular passenger trains on the other parts of the road are equipped with air brakes operated from the engine. The roadbed is a dirt ballast, and the passenger car on the mixed train is dirtier and dustier than the passenger cars on the west end of the road. There is often an odor from the stock cars ahead of the passenger coach. It is bad for ladies and children. The stock cars are frequently filthy and offensive from the manure in them. The train is often delayed at the stations to take on and deliver freight. It is subject to jars that stagger the passengers. Much switching is done, and, where switching is done at a station, the passenger coach is usually uncoupled; and passengers must wait while the cars are loaded with stock, cattle, and hogs, and are often inconvenienced by the gang planks thrown out. The country through which the mixed train passes is a farming country, and well settled. The products shipped are mostly grain, mill products, and live stock; and the freight distributed along the line is merchandise. St. Louis seems to be the commercial center for that part of the state. Of the counties through which the mixed train runs, Franklin county has a population of 17,138; Perry county, 17,259; Saline county, 19,342. And, of the towns along the line of the road, Duquoin has a population of about 5,000; Benton, 1,200; Eldorado, 2,000; Galatia, 800; Thompsonville, 500; Raleigh, 500; Christopher, 200; Mulkeytown, 200. Improved lands in that section are worth from $20 to $50 per acre. Such being the character of the mixed train, and such being the character and population of the territory through which the mixed train runs, ought appellee to be required to furnish the people with a passenger train? The question is not whether appellee should run more than one train, but the question is whether it does all that it is required to do when it runs a passenger coach attached to a freight train, or whether it is its duty to run one or more passenger coaches, separate and disconnected from freight cars, for the accommodation of passengers only, and not of passengers in connection with shippers.

When it sought by mandamus to compel a railroad company to do any act in relation to the equipment and operation of its road, the courts, as a general rule, will not interfere...