Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

All charges, tolls, fares and rates shall be just and reasonable, (8) and no change shall be made in any tariffs, rates, joint rates, fares, tolls, schedules or classifications in force at the time this act takes effect except as hereinafter provided .

tained at considerable expense by the utility to save the time required to send a man to open the valves, and any carelessness or oversight in the operation of the switch would result in damage to the company. Bluefield v. Bluefield Water & Imp. Co. Bul. No. 31; 1917 An. Rep. 197; P. U. R. 1917E-22.

WATER SERVICE-PURITY OF WATER A water utility whose supply of water was admittedly unwholesome was directed to so equip and operate its plant as to furnish its consumers pure and wholesome water fit for use. Thorn v. Montgomery L. & W. Co. Bul. No. 11; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 181; P. U. R. 1916C-406.

A water utility is under a duty to furnish pure and wholesome water which duty cannot be affected by the insufficiency of its revenue to enable it to furnish water of such quality. Thorn v. Montgomery L. & W. Co. Bul. No. 11; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 181; P. U. R. 1916C-406.

The first consideration of a utility engaged in the business of supplying water to consumers should always be to furnish a high grade of water to the people it serves. Re Buckhannon L. & W. Co., Bul. No. 27; 1917 An. Rep. 218.

Defendant ordered to equip its plant so as to furnish consumers with reasonably clear, pure and wholesome water, and to increase its mains to sufficient capacity to insure the city the necessary quantity of water for reasonable fire protection. Re Logan Water Works, Bul. No. 29; 1917 An. Rep. 231.

À water company by engaging in the business and undertaking to supply water to the inhabitants of a city and in charging and collecting revenue therefrom, assumes certain obligations from which it cannot escape; among which, and to the mind of the commission, is by far the most essential, is the duty of, furnishing pure and wholesome water at all times for domestic use. Re Logan Water Works, Bul. No. 29; 1917 An. Rep. 231.

WATER SERVICE-SPRINKLING PURPOSES Consumers paying the rate prescribed in the franchise "for yard hydrants for the purpose of sprinkling lawns and for domestic use" have the right to use water from such hydrants for the purpose of sprinkling gardens where the garden is upon the same lot upon which the hydrant is located. S. Buckhannon v. Buck. L. & W. Co., Bul. No. 5; Bien Rep. 1915-16, p. 186; P. U. R. 1915E-383. Grand Jct. Water Works Co. v. Davies, Ann. Cas. 1912B-620.

SERVICE-RULES AND CHARACTER OF

A rule providing for turning off the water supply for non-payment, and requiring, as a condition to turning it on again, the payment of interest charges together with the actual cost of turning it off and

on, is a reasonable one although no provision is made for notice. Bluefield v. Bluefield Water Works & Imp. Co., Bul. No. 31; 1917 An. Rep. 197; P. U. R. 1917E-22.

40 Cyc. 804; 30 A. & M. Enc. Law, Second Ed., 420; Brumm. v. Pottsville Water Co., (Pa) 12 Atl. 855; Tacoma Hotel Co. v. Tacoma W. & L. Co. (Wash.) 14 L. R. A. 669.

A natural gas rate subject to a prompt-payment discount of two cents per M. cubic feet was preferred to a higher rate subject to a discount of five cents which would make the same net charge. Re Montgomery Gas Co., Bul. No. 28; 1917 An. Rep. 136; P. U. R. 1917C-924.

The furnishing of water by the meter system is the only fair and equitable method, and the only method under which the careful consumer is not compelled to pay for water wasted by a careless consumer. Re Charles Town Water Co., Bul. No. 9; Bien. Rep. 1915-16 p. 84; P. U. R. 1916D-725.

Authority was given to an electrical utility to adopt a block system of rates proposed by it after complaint of its connected load system of rates had been lodged with the commission by a city and individual consumers, it appearing that the proposed rates would not yield with the present number of consumers more than four and one-half per cent of the value of the plant, not allowing for depreciation. Wellsburg v. Tri-State E. & L. Co., Bul. No. 10; Bien. Rep. 1915-16 p. 95; P. U. R. 1916C-258.

The imposition of a minimum or readiness-to-serve, charge for electric current is a justifiable and proper method of meeting certain operating expenses who have little or no relation to the quantity of current sold. Wellsburg v. Tri-State E. & L. Co., Bul. No. 10; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 95; P. U. R. 1916C-258.

Landon v. Lawrence, P. U. R. 1915E-763; Lake Forest v. Lake Forest Water Co., P. U. R. 1915D-1008; Re Ladysmith Lighting Co., P. U. R. 1915A-1050; Meek v. Consumers' E. L. & P. Co. P. U. R. 1915A-956. - A minimum charge may be made for water. Re Warwood Water & Light Co., Bul. No. 25; 1917 An. Rep. 188, P. U. R. 1917C-329.

RATESREASONABLENESS OF-ELEMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED (8) A subsidiary natural gas company's proportionate share of the general expenses of the parent company is a proper charge to be considered in fixing rates. Re Glenville Natural Gas Co., Bul. No. 6; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 120; P. U. R. 1915F-848.

A schedule of rates proposed by a railroad carrier for the transportation of limestone products in carload lots from the quarry of the complainant shipper was found unjust, unreasonable and discriminatory as to the complainant; and the commission fixed a schedule of rates in lieu thereof, based on distance, value of product, risk of hauling and cost of handling on a two-line haul. Greer v. B. & 0. & M. & K. R. Co's., Bul. No. 7; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 145; P. U. R. 1916D-286.

It is in the interest of the general welfare that freight rates on fertilizers and materials used in road-making, be made as low as reasonably possible, in view of the benefits accruing to the public, Every railroad shall permit switch connections for intra-state business to be made with its tracks at suitable and safe points by other carriers or shippers, upon

and to railroad carriers themselves, from good roads and improved farms. Greer v. B. & 0. & M. & K. R. Co's.; Bul. No. 7; Bien Rep. 1915-16, p. 145; P. U. R. 1916D-286.

In a schedule of rates for the transportation of limestone-products the rate on pulverized lime, based on value should be higher than on crushed lime; and the rate on burnt lime, based on value, risk of hauling, and the cost of handling, should be greater than on the pulverized product. Greer v. B. & O. & M. & K. R. Co's; Bul. No. 7; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 145; P. U. R. 1916D-286.

In fixing a schedule of rates for the transportation of limestone products from a certain quarry, the commission did not take into consideration the fact that the quality of the lime was somewhat inferior to that of competing quarries, or that the cost of its production was greater. Greer v. B. & O. & M. & K. R. Co's.; Bul. No. 7; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 145; P. U. R. 1916D-286.

In fixing the rates for the transportation of limestone products from a point on a short-line feeder to a trunk line to certain points on such trunk line, the commission proceded on the principle that the rate charged the industry so situate ought to be very reasonable, but that the increased cost of service incident to a two-line haul justified a rate somewhat higher than where the movement was over a single line. Greer v. B. & O. & M. & K. R. Co's.; Bul. No. 7; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 145; P. U. R. 1916D-286.

Weatherford Cham. Com. v. Mo. K. & T. R. Co. 31 I. C. C. 66; Omaha Grain Exchange v. Mo. P. R. Co., 30 I. C. C. 576; Sheridan Cham. Com. v. C. B. & Q. R. Co. 26 I. C. C. 638; Hughes Creek Coal Co. v. K. & M. Ry. Co., 31 I. C. C. 10; R. R. Com. v. St. L. S. W. R. Co., 34 I. C. C. 472; Re Fourth Secs. violations in S. E. 30 I. C. C. 153.

Re Inv. Rates on meat, 22 I. C. C. 166; Okla. Cotton Seed Crushers v. Mo. .K & T. R. Co., 35 I. C. C. 94.

A natural gas utility was permitted to increase its rates for domestic service from twelve cents per thousand cubic feet to fourteen cents per thousand cubic feet, gross, subject to a deduction of two cents per thousand feet for prompt payment, and to increase its rates to factories and industrial consumers from four to five cents per thousand cubic feet to five cents per thousand cubic feet net; it appearing that, while under the old rates the income of the petitioner would ordinarily be sufficient, the utility had employed most of the net revenue in augmenting its capital account and that its field showed signs of exhaustion. Re Bridgeport Natural Gas & Oil Co., Bul. No. 8; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 210; P. U. R. 1916C-253.

An increased rate to be charged by water utility for fire hydrants was fixed by the commission' upon the theory that a very large part of the cost of readiness-to-serve in water works is due to the necessity for larger mains for fire protection. Re Charles Town Water Co., Bul. No. 9; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 84; P. U. R. 1916D-725.

A rate of 192c per kilowatt-hour charged by an electric utility for current furnished to an electric railroad carrier was held not to be unreasonably low, where it appeared that the electric utility purchased the current at from one cent to 1920 per kilowatt-hour, that there was practically no loss in the transmission of the current to the railroad carrier, that by reason of the large quantity consumed by the railroad carrier the electrical utility was able to purchase current at a very much reduced rate, and that more than half of the net earnings of the utility was derived from sales of current to the railroad carrier. Wellsburg v. Tri-State E. & L. Co., Bul. No. 10; Bien. Rep. 191516, p. 95; P. U. R. 1916C-258.

A natural gas company may be permitted to increase a rate in order to secure an adequate return although the present rate was voluntarily established by it; since the general rule that a rate voluntarily established by a public utility company is presumed to be reasonable should not be strictly applied in the case of a natural gas company, owing to the peculiar hazards of the business. Re United Fuel Gas Co., Bul. No. 21; 1917 An. Rep. 80; P. U. R. 1917A-923.

Garrett v. South Penn Oil Co., 66 W. Va. 591.

The price of a commodity furnished by a public utility should never exceed the value of that commodity to the public. Re Middlebourne Gas Co., Bul. No. 22; 1917 An. Rep. 109.

In passing upon rates and serivces for a consolidated telephone system, the commission approved a reduction of the free service area with a lower rental and the establishment of toll charges, where it appeared that the proposed rates and service would more nearly result in each subscriber paying for his own service and would insure more efficient service. Re C. & P. Tel. Co., Bul. No. 32; 1917 An. Rep; P. U. R. 1917E-955.

Applicant is entitled to a rate sufficient to provide for depreciation, pay the cost and expenses of operation and repairs, taxes and a fair rate of interest and return. Re W. Va. Trac. & Elec. Co., Bul. 34.

Rates were based largely upon passed consumption, the order reciting that should said rates become unjust or unreasonable by reason of a change in industrial conditions any party interested might apply for a modification of the rates fixed, for which purpose the case was retained on the docket. Re West Union Nat. Gas Co., Bul. No. 35.

Ordinarily, a branch line railroad built for the primary purpose of serving an industry under a common ownership, will be regarded as a plant facility, unless the contrary clearly appears notwithstanding such a railroad may be a separate corporate entity and may have assumed the legal status of a common carrier. In such cases the operations of sa road aside of its main activitie is in the nature of a by-product and rates for such operations should be based upon the reasonable value of the service rendered without regard to the question of a return upon the value of the investment in the railroad alone. Re Winifrede R. R. Co., Bul. No. 36.

Increased cost of materials, supplies and labor, will not justify an increased cost of operation to the extent of making monthly expenses for the year 1917 almost double that of 1916. Re Winifrede R. R. Co., Bul. No. 36.

An increase in coal tariffs beyond 15c per ton, for this character of service, would defeat the development, and so handicap the operation of other coal properties adjacent to the railroad line, so as to render prohibitive the mining of coal in normal times. Re Winifrede R. R. Co., Bul. No. 36.

Unusual cost of supplies for the year 1917 (amounting to many times that of 1916) should be spread over a number of years, or charged to capital account. Re Winifrede R. R. Co., Bul. No. 36

such terms and conditions as the commission may prescribe, whenever the business to be offered by the connecting company or shipper, in the judgment of the commission, justifies it. (9) Every railroad and other transportation company may

consumer.

*

The increased expenses of operation incident to war conditions is necessarily abnormal and temporary, and this burden should not be borne alone by the shipper, but in part by the carrier as well.

Re Winifrede R. R. Co. Bul. No. 36. The average operating costs for the last

three years is used as a basis of operating costs for rate making purposes in this particular case. Re Winifrede R. R. Co., Bul. No. 36.

It is unjust to require applicant's gas consumers to pay rates that would earn returns on an item of expenses for the organization of a merger with other companies for the reason that it is a question as to the extent of the value of the property of the original Huntington Company useful in the public service in which it was engaged, was enhanced by such merger. Re Huntington Dev. & Gas Co., Bul. No. 38.

Rates fixed for the future in justice to the utility, cannot be fixed upon an investment cost or value which has since been materially increased, nor can they, in fairness to the consumer, be based upon an investment for a period when the whole thereof is not devoted to the public use and upon earnings based upon such investment, nor for the purpose of re-imbursing the utility for a deficiency in past earnings except to the extent of capitalizing a fair allowance for going value. Re United Fuel Gas Co., Bul. No. 43.

A furnishing of water by the meter system is the only fair and equitable method, and the only method under which the careful consumer is not compelled to pay for water wasted by a careless

Re Charles Town Water Co., Bul. No. 9; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 84; P. U. R. 1916D-725.

A joint tariff which charges a certain fixed rate per ton by all railroads, for carrying from iron ndustries a refuse or by-product known as slag not consigned by the mills to any particular point, nor controlled by them in transit, regardless of the value of said slag to the different rallroads and regardless of the location of the mills with respect to points on said road where the same is used for track repairs and upkeep purposes, is not a proper tariff. Nat. Tube Co., v. P. C. C. & St. L. R. R. Co., Bul. No. 20; 1917 An. Rep. 145.

Minimum water rates of $6.00 per year and $10.00 per year or pro rata per month, for each of two cities supplied by one company were increased to $9.00 in the first city only, rather than to $12.00 in both cities, on the ground that a 100% increase in the rates of the poorer classes was not justified, and that the increase in the latter city would discriminate against it. Re Benwood & MoMechen Con. Water Co., Bul. No. 23; 1917 An. Rep. 169; P. U. R. 1916D-460.

RATES-REASONABLENESS OF PARTICULAR SCHEDULES A water company was required to furnish water for yard hydrants at $5.00 for corner lots and $4.00 for inside lots where the water is used for the dwelling house, for all domestic purposes, and for sprinkling lawns, gardens, and streets under a franchise fixing water rates for water "for residences" at $10 and $12 per year where the water is piped into the house, and “for hydrants for the purpose of sprinkling lawns and for domestic use

a sum not to exceed $5 for corner lots and $4 for other lots," since it is not unreasonable to presume that where the water is piped into the dwelling much more will be used by the consumer than where he is put to the inconvenience of carrying it from the yard. Bul. No. 5; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 186; P. U. R. 1915F-383.

The commission upon an application of a water utility for the approval of a schedule of rates involving general increases and the addition of a meter schedule of meter rates for commercial and manufacturing purposes providing a minimum of $7 per annum for 15,000 gallons and a step charge of 40c per thousand gallons for the next 5,000 gallons and 30c per thousand gallons for the next 10,000 gallons, 250 for the next 30,000, 20c for the next 40,000, and 10c per thousand gallons for all in excess of 100,000 gallons, subject to a discount of 5% for prompt payment. Re Charles Town Water Co., Bul. No. 9; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 84; P. U. R. 1916D-725.

Meter rates were established for a water utility which had no meter rates, ranging from a minimum or readiness-to-serve charge of 750 monthly for 1,500 gallons, and a charge of 45c per 1,000 gallons, to a charge of 8c per thousand gallons for an excess of over 30,000 gallons. Thorn v. Montgomery L. & W. Co., Bul. No. 11; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 181; P. U. R. 1916C-406.

A minimum charge of $5 rather than $6 was fixed for a maximum six month's allowance of 12,000 gallons of water; a minimum of $1 per month to be paid for use of water for a shorter period than six months. Re Warwood Water & Light Co., Bul. No. 25; 1917 An. Rep. 188; P. U. R. 1917C329.

JURISDICTION OVER SWITCH CONNECTIONS (9) The commission has authority under section 4 of chapter 15-0 of the Code of W. Va. to require an interstate railroad to grant a shipper located along its line of track, switch connection, where the intrastate business to be offered justifies such connections, even though it may appear that interstate shipments will be offered at the same point. Peters v. N. & W. Ry. Co., Bul. No 37.

The Public Service Commission under the provisions of section 4 of the public service commission act has practically the same authority, as to the installation of switches for intrastate business that the Interstate Commerce Commission has over the installation of switches for interstate business under section 1 of the Interstate Commerce act. Peters v. N. & W. Ry. Co., Bul No. 37.

The Act of Congress to Regulate Commerce, as amended (Act of Congress, Feb. 4, 1887, chap. 104, 24 Stat. at L. 379, Comp. Stat. 1916, sections 8563 et seq.) conferring upon the Interstate Commerce Commission authority to compel railroads engaged in interstate commerce to provide shipping facilities for shippers tendering interstate shipments sufficient to justify the construction and maintenance of the same, does not deprive the Public Service Commission of jurisdiction to require such a railroad to provide such facilities to a shipper offering intrastate commerce in such quantities as warrant the installation of the facilities demanded, even though such facilities, when provided, may be used in the shipment of interstate as well as intrastate commerce. Norfolk &

be required by the commission to establish and maintain such suitable public service facilities and conveniences as may be reasonable (10) and just, to make

Western Railway Company v. Public Service Commission, 82 W. Va., 96 S. E. 62; Washington & O. D. R. Co. v. Royster Guano Co., (Va.) P. U. R. 1918C-189, 94 S. E. 763; Jacobson V. M. & P. R. Co., 71 Minn. 519, 40 L. R. A. 389; affirmed, 179 U. S. 287, 45 L. ed. 194; Chicago R. I & P. R. Co. v. State, (Okla.) L. R. A. 1916F-1281.

The duty enjoined upon the defendant company as a common carrier, in regard to granting permission for switch connections, together with the benefits derived therefrom, outweighs all the expenses and inconveniences that may result to it by reason of the installation of said switch connection. Peters v. N. & W. Ry. Co., Bul. No. 37.

If it were apparent to the commission that the proposed plant of complainant could not be operated at a profit, it would be its duty to dismiss the petition. Peters v. N. & W. Ry. Co., Bul. No. 37.

The commission has jurisdiction of the matters set forth in petition of applicant and finds that the places or points where said applicant seeks to nstall and connect its said switch with defendant's track is suitable and safe, and that the intrastate business to be offered said defendant justifies the establishment of the switch as requested by complainant. Peters v. N. & W. Ry. Co., Bul. No. 37.

Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Higdon, 234 U. S. 592; W's. Minn. and Pac. R. R. Co. v. Jacobson, 179 U. S. 287; State v. Kn'ght, 192 U. S. 20; Bayster Guano Co. v. Wash'ngton and Old Dom. Ry. Co., P. U. R. 1916D- 16. Contra. R’y

v. Abiline, 204 U. S. 426; N. Y. C. R. Co. v. Winifrede, 204 U. S. 147; Northern Pac. R’y Co. v. Washington 222 U. S: 370; Shreveport Case, 234 U. S. 342.

JURISDICTION OF COMMISSION-FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT (10) The Public Service Comm'ss'on has authority, under chapter 9, Acts 1913, to requre railroads to provide adequate facilities for_the transportation of persons and property on both main and lateral lines. C. & O. Ry Co. v. Public Serv. Com. 75 W. Va. 100.

JURISDICTION OF COMMISSION-EXTENSION AND ABANDONMENT OF SERVICE

The West Virginia Commission has jurisdiction to require a railroad to receive a sleep:ng car from another railroad and to attach it to an interstate train, to furnish through sleeping car service, since that is not an unwarranted interference with interstate commerce. Public Service Commission v. C. & O. R. R. Co., Bul. No. 12; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 164; P. U. R. 1916E-353.

C. B. & Q. R. Co. v. Railroad Com., 237 U. S. 220; Sligh v. Kirkwood, 237 U. S. 52; Ill. C. R Co. v. Mulberry Hill Coal Co., 238 U. S. 275; Mitchell v. St. L. & S. F. R. Co., P. U. R. (Mo.) 1915F-1109; Reid v. Chicago R. I. & P. R. Co. P.U.R. (Mo.) 1915E-906; Hughson v. Deluth S. S. & A. R. Co.,P. U. R. (Wis.) 1915A-244; Nolan v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co., P. U. R. 1915A240; Michigan C.'R. Co. v. Michigan R. Com., 236 U. S. 615; Gladson v. Minn. 166 U. S. 427.

The W. Va. Commission has authority, in passing upon the propriety of the abandonment of a street car line and the substitution of motor bus service therefor, to take into consideration a contract of the street railway's lessor to give service in exchange for a right of way, and implied contracts to render service to lot owners along the line who bought from the land company owned and controlled by the owners of the street railway. Re Charleston Int. R. R. Co., Bul. No. 15 Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 224; P. U. R. 1916F-338.

ADEQUATE FACILITIES Railroad companies because their corporate existence emanates from the public, owe to it in return therefor certain duties performance of which they cannot evade among them being the establishment and maintenance of reasonable facilities for transportation of both persons and freight. C. & 0. R’y Co. v Public Service Com., 75 W. Va. 100.

Southern Pacific Co. v. Com., 119 Pac. 727; Mills on Eminent Domain, Sec. 14; Alcot v. Supervisors, 16 Wall. 678.

So long as it retains its corporate entity, a railroad is legally compellable to furnish reasonably adequate facilities for the transportation of persons and property on the lines operated, whether main or branch lines, subject to such regulations and charges as are prescribed by statute, or by the corporation with general statutory provisions; provided only that the requirements therefor viewed in the light of all circumstances attendant thereon, does not entail a substantial loss to the operator. C. & O. R’y Co. v. Public Service Commission, 75 W. Va. 100.

To be adequate the service and facilities of a railroad must be commensurate with the duties to be performed, the extent of the demand for transportation , the cost and returns of the additional service, when properly ascertained and found to be consonant with the various other circumstances and conditions under which the performance is required. C. & 0. Ry. Co. v. Public Service Com. 75 W. Va. 100.

The word “adequate" does not presuppose the previous existence of either service or facilities therefor. It is applicable to cases where the railroad company has failed to provide service and where it has provided insufficient service. C. & O. Ry. Co. v. Public Service Commission, 75 W Va. 100. Southern Pacific Co. v. Commission, 119 Pac. 727; Railroad Co. v. Supervisors 129 Pac. 506.

One of the duties of a railway company doing business as a common carrier is that of providing reasonably adequate facilities for serving the public. This duty arises out of the acceptance and enjoyment of the powers and privileges granted by the state, and endures so long as they are retained. C. & O. Ry. Co. v. Public Service Commission, 242 U. S. 603.

A common carrier will not be excused from its duty of furnishing shipping facilities to one offering commerce to it, upon the ground that all of its energies are required to meet government needs brought about by the present state of war, where it does not appear that the granting of such facilities would divert any of the carrier's energies, or require of it service which would make it less able to perform its public duty. Norfolk & Western Railway Company v. Public Service Commission, 82 W. Va. —; 96 S. E. 62.

reasonable connection with trains on branch lines of such railroads and with all connecting railroad lines; to require any passenger trains to stop at junctions or intersections with other railroads; and may prescribe the number of men required to constitute safe crews for the handling of trains on any steam railroad in this state or any division of any such railroad. No steam railroad

ADDITIONAL SERVICE The mere question of convenience, incident to the running of an additional train on a branch line of a railway, will not justify an order that will entail considerable additional expense on the part of the railway company. Raleigh Co. Business Men's Asso. v. C. & 0. Ry. Co., Bul. No. 13; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 130.

In determining the question of the reasonableness and justness of requiring defendant to operate an additional train over a certain portion of its road, the principal questions to be considered are the needs of the public, and the cost to the utility. Sutton v. C. & C. R’y Co., Bul. No. 19; 1917 An. Rep. 153.

A test, made by the defendant by operating a morning train for several months to ascertain whether such operation would create and develop new business, is not a fair one, where the train was not regarded by the defendant as a "regular train," was never scheduld or advertised, and defendant did not in any way hold itself

out to the public as operating such a train. Sutton v. C. & C. R’y Co., Bul. No. 19; 1917 An. Rep. 153.

That the performance by a railroad of the extra service in carrying a sleeper as orderd by the Public Service Commission will cause a pecuniary loss to the carrier, is not alone, sufficient to prove it to be confiscatory. In order to determine that question petitioner's entire intrastate earnings, from its passenger traffic must be taken into account. C. & O. R’y Co. v. Public Service Com., 78 W. Va. 667.

Atlantic Coast Line v. N. C. Cor. Com., 206 U.S. 1; Chicago B. & Q. R’y Co. v. Wis. R. R. Com., 237 U. S. 220; C. & 0. R’y Co. v. Public Service Com., 75 W. Va. 100; Oregon R R. Co. & N. Co., v. Fairchild, 224 U. S. 510.

An order, made by the Public Service Commission, commanding the Cnesapeake & Ohio Ra lway Co. to attach to its train No. 34, scheduled to leave Huntington daily at 7:45 A. M. and transport to Charleston a car, denominated the Wheeling Sleeper, carried to Huntington by the Ohio River Division of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, and to return the same to Huntington on the same day by means of its train No. 33, scheduled to leave Charleston at 7:15 P. M. and arrive at Huntington at 9:00 P. M., is held to impose an unreasonable and unnecessary burden upon said company in view of facilities already furnished by its trains, Nos. 33 and 34, and unjust and unfair to the carrier, because of the unnecessary burden imposed upon it and the pecuniary loss incurred by it in performing the extra service. Č. & 0. Ry. Co. v. Public Service Commission, 78 W. Va. 667.

In passing upon the reasonableness of an order of the Public Service Commission, directing the installation of passenger service on a branch line of a rallroad, the pecuniary loss resulting therefrom is only one circumstance to be considered. The nature and extent of the carriers business, its productiveness, the character of service required; the public need for it, and its effect upon the service already being rendered, are also to be considered. C. & 0. Ry. Co. v. Public Service Commission, 242 U. S. 603.

Requiring a railroad to furnish through sleeping car service at a loss is not conclusively unreasonable and beyond the power of the commission to require, since consideration must be given to the utility's return as a whole the degree of convenience to the public and the reasonableness of the demand for the service under the facts of each case. Public Service Commission v. C. & 0. R’y Co., Bul. 12; Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 164; P. U. R. 1916E-353.

SERVICE-NON-COMPENSATORY

See Yazoo & M. Valley R. Co. v. R. R. Com., 130 La 1012; State v. Chi. B. & Q. R. Co., 239 Mo. 196; Chi. B. & Q. R. Co. v. R. R. Com. 152 Wis. 654; Colo. & S. R. Co. v. State R. Com., 54 Colo. 54; Nelson v. North. P. R. Co., 8 Wis. R. C. R. 685; North P. R. Co. v. North Dak. 236 U. S. 585; Nor. & W. R. Co. v. Conley, 236 U. S. 437; St. L. & S. F. R. Co. v. Gill, 156 U. S. 649; Atl. Coast Line v. N. C. Com., 206 U. S. 1; Wis. M. & P. R. Co., v. Jacobson, 179 U. S. 287; Worchester v. Norwich & W. R. Co., 109 Mass. 112; People v. Dutchess & C. R. Co., 58 N. Y. 152; People v. Boston & A. R. Co., 70 N. Y. 569; People v. N. Y., L. E. & W. R. Co., 104 N. Y. 58.

SERVICE-ABANDONMENT OF A street railway seeking authority to discontinue service on a line which it has agreed to furnish service has the burden of showing that it cannot perform the obligation of the contract consistently with its duties to the public, or that continuation thereof has become burdensome, oppressive, or otherwise inequitable. Re Charleston Interurban R. R. Co., Bul. No. 15, Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 224; P. U. R. 1916F-338.

13 W. R. C. R. 345.

A railroad may be permitted to discontinue a passenger train each way daily to a small town on a branch line, although only one remaining train each way will not serve the public convenience where there is no real necessity for the discontinued train, its revenues do not meet the "out of pocket” operating cost, and the receipts are steadily declining on the entire system, which is operated at a loss. Brady C. C. & C. Ry. Co., Bul. No. 14, Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 203; P. U. R. 1916E-855. State v. Old Colony Trust Co., 215 Fed. 307; Wagner v. Grand Trunk R. Co., P. U. R. (N. H.) 1915F-905; Schmitt v. Chi. N. W. R. Co., P. U. R. (Wis.) 1915A-4; Farmers Transp. Asso. v. Penn R. Co., P. U. R. (N. J.) 1915E-242.

That a particular line of a street railway system is unprofitable is not in itself sufficient to justify discontinuance of service thereon where the system as a whole is profitable. Re Charleston Interurban R. R. Co., Bul. No. 15, Bien. Rep. 1915-16, p. 224; P. U. R. 1916F-338.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »