Great Northern Railway Co. v. Minnesota Ex Rel. State Railroad & Warehouse Commission

Citations

• 238 U.S. 340
• 35 S. Ct. 753
• 59 L. Ed. 1337
• 1915 U.S. LEXIS 1624

Syllabus

<p>An order of. a state railroad commission requiring a railroad Company to install and maintain scales amounts'to a taking-of the company’s property; and, if the order is arbitrary or unreasonable, the taking is without due process of law and in yiolation of the Fourteenth Amendment.</p> <p>The facts established must be adequate as a matter of law to support a finding of < requisite public necessity in justifying an order of a state railroad commission to require a railroad company to expend money —the mere declaration of the commission is not conclusive.</p> <p>The business of a- railroad is transportation and to supply the public with conveniences not connected therewith is no part of its ordinary duty.</p> <p>Even though the state railroad commission may have power conferred by statute to require railroad companies to supply necessary demands of the public along their transportation lines, the Commission may only require them to supply such demands as are within'the duty of a raijroad company.</p> <p>Where facilities .afforded by a railroad company are at certain of its stations outside of its actual duty to supply but produce discrimination, the railroad commission of the State may not absolutely require it to supply such facilities at every station in order to inhibit .discrimination; it must give the company the opportunity of discontinuing furnishing the facilities where supplied and thus to avoid discrimination in that manner if it sees fit so to do.</p> <p>Possessions of a railroad company are subject to its public duty but beyond this and within charter limits, like other owners of private property, the company may control its own affairs.</p> <p>An order of the Minnesota State Railroad Commission requiring a railroad company to install weighing scales at'a station similar to those installed at some of its stations in order to abate discrimination held arbitrary and unreasonable as it did not give the company the alternative right of discontinuing the sca