West Virginia Northern R. Co. v. United States

• Decision Date: 15 November 1904
• Docket Number: 541.
• Citation: 134 F. 198
• Parties: WEST VIRGINIA NORTHERN R. CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES ex rel. KINGWOOD COAL CO.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

134 F. 198

WEST VIRGINIA NORTHERN R. CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES ex rel.

KINGWOOD COAL CO.

No. 541.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

November 15, 1904

The Kingwood Coal Company was a corporation engaged in the mining and shipping of coal in Preston county, W. Va., on the line of the West Virginia Northern Railroad Company, and the Irona Coal Company and the Atlantic Coal & Coke Company were also so engaged, the mines of the three companies being the only collieries so located and operated.

May 1 1903, the Kingwood Coal Company, as relator, filed its petition in mandamus under the acts of Congress of February 4, 1887, c. 104, 24 Stat. 379 (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3154) March 2, 1889, c. 382, 25 Stat. 855 (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p 3158), and February 8, 1895, c. 61, 28 Stat. 643 (U.S. Comp St. 1901, p. 3171), against the West Virginia Northern Railroad Company, J. H. Weaver, the Irona Coal Company, and the Atlantic Coal & Coke Company, in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of West Virginia, charging that the railroad company, in the transportation of the coal mined at said mines, which entered into and became part of the interstate commerce of the country, had been and was discriminating in favor of the Atlantic Coal & Coke Company and the Irona Coal Company and against the Kingwood Coal Company, and praying, on grounds set forth, that the court determine that the Kingwood Coal Company is entitled to 33 1/3 per cent. of the total car supply furnished by the railroad company to shippers of coal along its lines, and that the railroad company and Weaver be required, 'according to their several and respective powers,' to cease to discriminate, and to furnish relator at least the percentage named.

An alternative writ of mandamus was thereupon issued to the railroad company and J. H. Weaver embodying the case stated in the petition; their codefendants being also summoned to appear.

To this writ the railroad company and Weaver filed their joint return and answer. It was admitted, among other things, that Weaver had no interest in the Kingwood Coal Company; that he held a majority of the stock of the Irona Coal Company; that he was the Atlantic Coal & Coke Company, which was a trading name adopted by him; that he owned a majority of the stock of the railroad company, was its president and a director, and exercised the powers and authority incident to the office 'in controlling and directing the operation of said railroad, and as such was and is subject to the provisions of the hereinbefore recited act of Congress'; and that it was 'the duty of the said railroad company, as a common carrier, and of the said J. H. Weaver, as an officer, to wit, president and director, of the said company, and his associates, according to their respective powers, to afford reasonable, proper, and equal facilities for the interchange of traffic between lines with which the said railroad company was and is connected, and for the receiving, forwarding, and delivering of property and passengers to and from the several lines of the said railroad company, defendant, and to connections therewith.'

Respondents denied all unlawful or unjust discrimination.

Issue having been joined, the cause was set for hearing on a day specified by an order of court which recited: 'At which time, by consent of parties, the matters of law and fact arising herein shall be presented to and determined by the court upon testimony taken at the bar of the court, parties, both plaintiff and defendant, waiving their right to demand a jury herein. ' Hearing was accordingly had on pleadings and proofs, and the court announced its decision and opinion, whereupon relator obtained leave to amend and amended the alternative writ by striking out 'thirty-three and one-third per cent.' and inserting 'thirty-one per cent.,' to which respondent preserved an exception.

Judgement was thereupon entered 'that the peremptory writ of mandamus do issue commanding the said West Virginia Northern Railroad Company and J. H. Weaver, according to their several and respective powers, to cease to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to the Irona Coal Company or Atlantic Coal & Coke Company over the Kingwood Coal Company in the shipping and transportation of their coal, and to cease to subject the Kingwood Coal Company to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage in the shipping and transportation of its said cola or in any respect whatsoever, and to move and transport the traffic of the said Kingwood Coal Company without preference or discrimination, and upon conditions as favorable as are given by the said West Virginia Northern Railroad Company to the said Irona Coal Company and Atlantic Coal & Coke Company, or for like traffic under similar conditions to any other shipper, its fair and reasonable percentage of cars furnished by the West Virginia Northern Railroad Company to shippers of like traffic along its railroad line, based upon the capacity of the several shippers; and to furnish to the said Kingwood Coal Company, for the transportation of its coal, without discrimination, and upon conditions as favorable as those given to other shippers, at least thirty-one per cent. of the total car supply at this time to be distributed by the said West Virginia Northern Railroad Company or J. H. Weaver among the several miners and shippers of coal along the railroad lines of the said West Virginia Northern Railroad Company'; and against the Railroad Company for costs.

Respondents duly excepted, and tendered a bill of exceptions containing the evidence, which was signed and filed. From this it appeared that respondents at the hearing moved the court to make and certify certain special findings of fact as set forth, 'but the court, being of the opinion that the evidence heard upon said cause, the whole of the evidence being as hereinbefore set out, does not justify such special findings so prayed, refused to find the same, except in so far as a portion thereof deemed material by the court may be found in the written opinion of the court filed in this cause'; to which ruling respondents excepted. This writ of error was then allowed, and errors were assigned as follows: That the court erred (1) in entering judgment against the railroad company and Weaver jointly; (2) in entering judgment against the railroad company; (3) in entering judgment against Weaver; (4) in permitting the alternative writ to be amended; (5) in entering judgment compelling the delivery to the relator of 31 per cent. of the total of cars distributed, 'for the evidence as heard and the facts as certified by the court show that the relator, the Kingwood Coal Company, has not a capacity equal to 31 per cent. of the total capacity of the three mines'; (6) 'in refusing to certify the special findings of facts as prayed for'; (7) in entering the judgment rendered, 'because the same takes as the sole basis and test of the capacity for the coal output of the Kingwood mine the number of working places therein, when its entire equipment, working places included should have been considered in measuring its capacity.'

P. J. Crogan and John H. Holt, for plaintiffs in error.

V. Gilpin Robinson and John W. Davis, for defendant in error.

Before FULLER, Circuit Justice, and MORRIS and PURNELL, District Judges.

FULLER Circuit Justice (after stating the facts).

Inasmuch as it appeared that the West Virginia Northern Railroad Company was not the owner of any of the cars used on its line for the transportation of coal, but that such cars were furnished by the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, over whose tracks the coal ultimately reached market, and that after the delivery of the cars to the West Virginia Northern Railroad Company they were distributed by it among the mines along its line, the question to be determined under the pleadings was stated in the careful opinion of Golf, Circuit Judge, returned as part of the record before us, and reported in 125 F. 252, to be whether the West Virginia Northern Railway Company, in distributing the cars, made a just allotment of them among the three mines, or so assigned them as to unlawfully discriminate in favor of two of the mines against the other.

After pointing out that railroad companies could, by discrimination in distribution among competing coal companies, build up some and eventually destroy others, since the output was largely controlled by the number of cars available for use in sending the coal to market, prudent management requiring that no more coal should be mined at any time than could be promptly forwarded, and remarking on the danger of discrimination where the power of...