State v. Downes

• Decision Date: 07 December 1920
• Docket Number: No. 1679.,1679.
• Citation: 112 A. 246
• Parties: STATE v. DOWNES.
• Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court

112 A. 246

STATE

v. DOWNES.

No. 1679.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire. Rockingham.

Dec. 7, 1920.

Transferred from Superior Court, Rockingham County; Allen, Judge.

Alvah H. Downes was indicted for operating an automobile in the business of transporting passengers for hire along a regular route contrary to Laws 1919, c. 86.Case transferred on agreement of the parties.Respondent discharged.

William H. Sleeper, of Exeter, for the State.

John L. Mitchell, of Portsmouth, for respondent.

PARSONS, C. J."Every person, firm or corporation operating any motor vehicle other than a street car upon any public street or way in the business of transporting passengers for hire, and receiving and discharging passengers along a regular route over which the vehicle is operated, is hereby declared to be a common carrier and as such shall be subject to the provisions of this act so far as applicable thereto."Laws 1919, c. 86, § 1.The following sections of the chapter provide for the regulation of the business described in section one.The question presented is whether the defendant's business is within the terms of section 1, as it is conceded he is guilty if his business is so included.The business answers the description of the statute except possibly in a single particular: Passengers are received and discharged only at the termini of the route.The state claims that this is receiving and discharging passengers "along a regular route upon which the vehicle is operated," within the meaning of the statute.Such an interpretation might be placed upon the language.Construing "along" in the sense of "beside," or "at the side of," for which there is authority, the respondent may be said to receive and discharge passengers along the route, although he does so only at the termini.It is probable the passengers so mount and dismount from the vehicle.This would be so even if entrance to the vehicle is at the end instead of on the side.It is not probable the method of getting in or out of the vehicle of transportation was intended as the test by which the Legislature determined the necessity of regulation prescribed by the act.As passengers received and discharged only at the termini of a regular route in a sense are received and discharged along the route, the respondent is within the statute, if the Legislature intended to include a business so carried on.

"But as the same word or series of Words may convey very different meanings, according to the...