State v. Wrightsville & T.R. Co.
| Decision Date | 07 June 1898 |
| Citation | 30 S.E. 891,104 Ga. 437 |
| Parties | STATE v. WRIGHTSVILLE & T. R. Co. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
There is no law which confers upon the railroad commission of this state the power to compel a railroad company to make a contract for the shipment of goods beyond the terminus of its own line, or to issue a through bill of lading binding such company so to do; nor is the fact that a railroad company actually contracts for the shipment and delivery of goods beyond its own terminus to a designated point, and issues bills of lading accordingly, when the same are routed over a particular one of its connecting lines, to be treated as unjustly discriminating against another connecting line because the company first mentioned refuses to issue through bills of lading for the shipment over the latter of goods consigned to the same point of destination.
Error from superior court, Laurens county; John C. Hart, Judge.
Action by the state of Georgia against the Wrightsville & Tennille Railroad Company. From an order sustaining a demurrer to the petition, plaintiff brings error. Affirmed.
J. M Terrell, Atty. Gen., for the State.
A. F Daley, for defendant in error.
It appears from the record that the Wrightsville & Tennille Railroad Company refused to issue to some of its patrons through bills of landing beyond the terminus of its own line. Complaint of this action was made by the Augusta Southern Railroad Company to the railroad commission of Georgia, and that commission cited the Wrightsville & Tennille Railroad Company to appear before it to answer the complaint. After a hearing, the commission decided that the railroad company had violated rule 32 of the commission, and ordered it to issue to its patrons through bills of lading beyond the terminus of its line. After the passage of this order, another of the patrons of the Wrightsville & Tennille Railroad Company applied to it for a through bill of lading from Bruton, a point on its line, to Tennille, thence over the Augusta Southern road to Augusta, and thence over one or more roads in South Carolina to Savannah, in this state. The Wrightsville & Tennille Railroad Company refused to issue this bill of lading, but did issue one through to Savannah over its own line and that of the Central of Georgia Railroad Company. The railroad commission, through the attorney general of the state, brought this action for the recovery of a penalty of $5,000, as provided in section 2196 of the Civil Code. The railroad company demurred to the petition on the grounds that it set out no cause of action, that the railroad commission of Georgia had no right to require of defendant company the issuing of through bills of lading to points beyond its own terminus, and that the acts complained of related to shipments of freight going beyond the boundaries of the state of Georgia, and through the state of South Carolina, before reaching their destination. The court sustained the demurrer, and the state excepted.
The point made by the pleadings is whether the railroad commission of Georgia has power, under the law, to compel a railroad to issue a through bill of lading over its line, and beyond its terminus. We have carefully read rule 32 of the commission, which is alleged to have been violated by the defendant company, and we find that it is substantially in the language of the act of 1874 codified in sections 2212-2214 of the Civil Code. If, therefore, the defendant company violated rule 32, it also violated the law as declared in these sections of the Code, which are as follows: "All railroad companies in this state shall, at the terminus of any intermediate point, be required to switch off and deliver to the connecting road having the same gauge, in the yard of the latter, all cars passing over their lines, or any portion of the same, containing goods or freights consigned, without rebate or deception, by any route, at the option of the shipper, according to customary or published rates, to any point over or beyond such connecting road, and any failure to do so with reasonable diligence, according to the route by which such goods or freights were consigned, shall be deemed and taken as a conversion in law of such goods or freights, and shall give a right of action to the owner or consignee, for the value of the same, with interest, and not less than ten per cent., nor more than twenty-five per cent., for expenses and damages: Provided, that should the defendant, in any suit brought under this section set up as a defense, that the plaintiff has accepted a rebate, or practiced fraud or deception touching the rate, it shall be a complete reply to such defense if the plaintiff can prove that defendant, or its agents, have allowed a rebate or rebates, or practiced like fraud or deception from the same competing point against the rival line." "Where any railroad in this state joins another at any point along its line, or where two of such roads have the same terminus, either line, having the same gauge, may, at its own expense, join its tracks by proper and safe switches with the other, should such other road or company refuse to join in the work and expense." "No railroad company shall discriminate in its rates or tariff of freights in favor of any line or route connected with it as against any other line or route, nor, when a part of its own line is sought to be run in connection with any other route, shall such company discriminate against such connecting line or in favor of the balance of its own line, but shall have the same rates, and shall afford the usual and like customary facilities for interchange of freights to patrons of each and all routes of lines alike; any refusal of the same shall give a like right of action as mentioned in section 2212 of this Code." Section 2212, it will be observed, simply requires railroad companies, at the terminus or any intermediate point, to switch off and deliver to the connecting road of the same gauge all cars passing over their lines which contain goods or freight consigned by any route, according to customary or published rates, to any point beyond such connecting road. Section 2213 allows one railroad company, at its own expense, to join its tracks by switch with another. It is clear that neither of these sections confers upon the railroad commission the power to compel railroad companies to issue through bills of lading. In the petition in this case there is no complaint that the defendant railroad company refused to deliver to the Augusta Southern Railroad Company freight consigned to it, or to allow the Augusta Southern Railroad Company to join its tracks to the tracks of defendant company, or to allow the Augusta Southern Railroad Company to draw its cars from its own tracks to those of defendant company, or vice versa. Had any of these complaints been made, the case of Logan v. Railroad Co., 74 Ga. 684, relied upon by the attorney general, would have been applicable; but that decision, in our opinion, does not apply to the facts of the case under consideration any more than it did to the facts of Coles v. Railroad Co., 86 Ga. 251, 12 S.E. 749. In the case of Logan v. Railroad Co., the railroad company refused to receive freight in cars from another road, and the owner of the freight was compelled to haul it in drays from one road to the other.
Proceeding now to a consideration of section 2214 of the Civil Code, it will be seen that this section prohibits one railroad company from discriminating "in its rates or tariff of freights in favor of any line or route connected with it as against any other line or route," and declares it shall have the same rates for all lines, "and shall afford the usual and like customary facilities for interchange of freights to patrons of each and all routes or lines alike." In our opinion, these words do not confer upon the commission the...
To continue reading
Request your trial