Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1957 )


Menu:
  •                THE       ,!TTORNEY              GENERAL
    OF     TEXAS
    Aue-rxiw   xl. Tn8xAn
    WILL WI JA30N
    ATTORNRYGkzNERAJ.                  my 22,   1957
    HonorableJ. B. Walling,Chaiman                     opinionIvo.m-141
    CmmmCarriere Camittee                              Re3 Constitutionality
    Of
    House of Representatives                               SenateBill1CO, as
    Austin,Teraa                                           emended,relatingto
    pamenger servioeon
    Dear &.a Walling8                                      railroada.
    This is in euswer to your requeetfor au opiuionfrau this office
    as to the coustitutianality of Senate Bill 100. This Bill seeks to emu&
    Article 6479, veruon'sCivil Statutes,by providing:
    “2. It shall be the duty of the C~mnissionto see that
    upon each railroadin thie State oarryiugpasseugersforhire
    there shallbe runatlesstone train eaoh &ay,Suu&ays ex-
    cepte8,upon which passengersshall be hauled;provided,how-
    ever, the Ccmmissioumay, in its disoretion,upon applioation
    filed and after notice and hearing,relax such requirement
    as to auy railroad,or part, portionor braucb thereof,uheu
    (1) in its opinion,public om~enienoe pentkits of such relax-
    ation, and ma2 relax such requirementwhen it appearsupon
    suoh hearing that the ruuuingof one train each bay, Sundays
    excepted,is not necessaryin the renditionof adequate8er-
    vice to the public;or (2) that on auy railroad,or pmt, or
    portionor brauoh thereof,passengerserviceas frequeutas
    one train each day, Sundaysexcepted,with the passenger
    trafficofferedand reasonablytobe expeoted,doesnot and
    will not pay the cost of such serviceplus a reasonablere-
    turu upon the propertyemployediu the renditionof such
    servicej provided,however,that publicconvenienceshall
    always be a superiorconsiderationin detenuiuiugwhetheror
    not the requireukentof nmuiug at least one paesengertrain
    a day may be relaxed;. . .*
    The portim   of Article 6479 sought to be amendedpro~idesn
    “2. It shall be the duty of the Caomission to see that
    upon eaahrailroad in this State carryingpassengersforhire
    there shallbe nm atleastone train each day,Sundaye ex-
    cepted,upon which passengersshall be haul&j provided,how-
    ever, the C~nmiasionmay, in its diecretion,upon application
    filed and after notice an8 hearing,relax such requirement as
    to auy railroad,or part, portionor bran& thereof,when, in
    its opinion,public conveniencepermitsof such relaxation,
    .   .
    _   .I
    HonorableJ. B. Walling,Page 2 (WW-141)
    and shall relax such requirementwhen it appearsupou suoh
    hearing that the ruuuiugof oue train each day, Sundays
    excepted,is not necessaryin the renditionof adequate
    serviceto the public,or that on any railroad,or part,
    or portionor branoh thereof,passengerserviceas fre-
    quent as one train each day, Sundays excepted,with the
    passengertrafficofferedand reasonablyto be expected,
    doss not and will not pay the cost of such serviceplus
    a reasonablereturnupon the propertyemployedin the ren-
    ditionof such service;D 0 +*
    Under the proposedmuendnentthe RailroadCcmmissionis author-
    ized,but not required,,torelax the requirementof rmming at least one
    train each day, Sundaysexcepted,in two situations: (1) where public
    oonveniencepermiteor where such service,isnot necessaryin the rendi-
    tion of adequateserviceto the public,and (2) where the passengertraffic
    does no.t.:xld
    will not pay the cost of such serviceplus a reasonablereturn.
    The constitutionalproblemstems frcpnthe provisoto the seoond
    situationprovidingthat public convenienceshall alwaysbe a superior
    considerationin determiningwhether or not the requirementof runningat
    least one passengertrain a day may be relaxed. This pro~isicmis most
    Bmbiguotla,however,we interpretit to mean that when the Cauaisaionfinds
    that pablioconveniencerequiresthe contiuuedservice,but that the cost
    of such servicewill not pay for itself,the Ccmmissicmmust give greater
    weight to the publicconveniencein determiningwhether it should permit
    the relaxationof ths one train a day requirement. Such a provisiondoes
    not renderSenateBill 100 unconstitutional on its face.
    The railroadsin the exeroi6eof their publlo functionsas oaannan
    carriersare subjectto reasonableregulationsby the State. As au&, the
    railroadsten be requiredto furnishservicesand faoilitiesreasonably
    adequateto satisfythe publicneeds. Such authorityby the State may ex-
    tend to requiringthe ruuningof trains in additionto those providedby
    the carriereveu where this may involvescunepecuniaryloss. See Missls-
    sippi RailroadCommissionv. Mobile and Ohio RailroadCo., 244 OS=
    Under the 1925 statutesand court decisionsrelatingto the
    abandonmentof railroadsonce in operation,it was well settledthat the
    Legislaturecould requirethe railroadsto continuepassengerservioe
    regardlessof loss in operation. See State V* Rnid, 0. and W. Ry. co.,
    108 Tes. 239, 19lS.W. 5603 State Y. SugarlandR. Co., 
    163 S.W. 1047
    . III
    1927 the LegislatureamendedArticle 6479 to providethat the Commission
    could, in its discretion,relax the requ-&sent as to passengerservice
    by a certainclass of railroads. In 1933, the Legislaturefurtheramended
    Article 6479 permittingpassengerserviceto be relaxedunder conditions
    stated in the currentstatute.
    HonorableJ. B. Walling,Page 3 @W-141)
    Sinoe before1933 the Legielatureoould requiredaily passenger
    serviceregardleeeof whether the aervioewas profitable,we are of the
    opinionthat the Legislatureoau requirethe operationof daily passenger
    servioewheneverthe public oouveulencerequiresit, providedthat the Rail-
    road Is permittedto make a reasonableprofit ou its overalloperations.
    As to the effect of an amendmentprovidingfor trialde novo in
    appealsfrom orders of the RailroadCamDissionunder this statute,such an
    smendmentwouldhave no effectwhatsoeverupon appealsfron orders of the
    RailroadC-iesion under other statutes.
    SenateBf9.1lOC, seekingto amend Article 6479, V.C.S., in its
    presentform is oonstitutional.The amendmentwould require
    the Ccouni33sion
    to give a greaterweight or priorityto the
    consideration of the public conveniencethan to the cost of
    renderingsuch servioewhen the Camnission,isseekingto de-
    tenninewhether or not to relax the requirementof operating
    at least one passengertrain a day. Appeals trial de novo under
    thfr,ststrtewould have no effeotwhatsoeverupon appealsfrom
    orders of the RailroadCcsuuis~ionunder other statutes.
    WILL WIISON
    Attor#vyGeneralof Texas
    APPROVED:
    OPIIVION
    Cm:
    James 18.Ludlun,Chairmen
    WaylandC. Rivers,Jr.
    Jemes W. Wilson
    Robert 0. Smith
    RRVIEWDFORTEEATYORNRY   GRNERAL
    BY:
    Gee. P. Blezkburn
    

Document Info

Docket Number: WW-141

Judges: Will Wilson

Filed Date: 7/2/1957

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017