Tucker v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.

Citations

• 82 Kan. 222
• 108 P. 89
• 1910 Kan. LEXIS 232

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE .COURT.</p> <p>1. Maximum Rates — Transportation of OiD — Title of Act. Chapter 353 of the Laws of 1905 (Gen. Stat. 1909, §§ 7163-7165), establishing maximum rates for the transportation of oil, contains but one subject, which is clearly expressed in its title.</p> <p>2. - Statutory Damages Not a Fine for Breach of a Penal Law. The damages recoverable by an aggrieved shipper Under the act referred to do not constitute a fine for, the breach of a penal law, winch must go to the school fund under section 6 of article 6 of the constitution.</p> <p>3. - “Single-line Bates” — “Double-line Rates.” The distinction between “single-line rates” and “double-line rates” in the act mentioned is betwéen rates for shipment over a single line and rates for shipment over more than one line.</p> <p>4. - Segregation of Transportation of Oil from Transportation of Other, Commodities. The legislature was justified in segregating the transportation of oil from the transportation of other commodities, in making it the subject of special regulation, and in securing observance of such regulations by the imposition of special penalties.</p> <p>5. -Reasonableness of Rates- — Judicial Investigation. The act referred to does not either in express terms or by implication forbid a judicial investigation of the reasonableness of the rates fixed by the legislature, and the question is; open for determination by any court in which the carrier may be called to account.</p> <p>6. - Same. An opportunity to test once for all in a single suit against some officer or board the reasonableness of legislative rates is not essential to the protection of a carrier asserting that such rates are unreasonable. It is sufficient that the carrier can not he made to suffer the penalties prescribed 'until the question of reasonableness has been passed upon by a competent court.</p> <p>7. -Penalties Not Oppressive — Intimidation. The penalties prescribed by the act in question are not so oppressive '