Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Reed

Citations

• 114 Kan. 190
• 217 P. 322
• 1923 Kan. LEXIS 56

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Inefficient Telegraph Service — Utilities Commission May Require the Railroad Company and Telegraph Company to Improve That Service. Where a railway company and a telegraph company for their mutual convenience, economy and' profit enter into a contractual arrangement whereby a commercial telegraph service is supplied by them to the public through the use of the railway company’s telegraph wires and batteries and the use of the railway station as a telegraph office and through the use of the station agent’s service as. a telegraph operator, and where the railway company, pursuant to such arrangement, has for years supplied the public with commercial telegraph service, but only iú a careless, negligent, inefficient and unsatisfactory manner, the public utilities commission may require the railway company and the telegraph company to improve that service, to keep the telegraph office open for the efficient dispatch of business -for a reasonable number of hours per day, including Sunday, where the reasonable demands of the public so require, and the railway company’s plea that it has no charter powers to transact a telegraph business, is no excuse to relieve it from obedience to the reasonable orders of the commission.</p> <p>2. Same — Order Merely Requires Greater Efficiency in Service Being Performed. The order of the public utilities commission does not require the railway company to undertake some corporate duty it is not now assuming to perform; it merely requires greater efficiency and needed improvement in the service now being performed by the railway company.</p> <p>3. Same — Order Did Not Unlawfully or Unreasonably Interfere With Railroad Business. The order requiring the railway company and the telegraph company to keep open the telegraph office daily for a reasonable number of specified hours, according to central time as used by the public in the locality, did not unlawfully or unreasonably interfere with the railway comp