Union Transportation Co. v. Bassett

Citations

• 5 Cal. Unrep. 498
• 46 P. 907
• 1896 Cal. LEXIS 1126

Syllabus

<p>Harbor Commissioners — Review of Regulations by Courts.—Under Political Code, section 25-24, authorizing the state harbor commissioners to make “reasonable” regulations concerning the management of the property intrusted to them, and to assign suitable wharves for the exclusive use of vessels, the courts may review the regulations of said commissioners, and declare them invalid, if unreasonable.</p> <p>Harbor Commissioners — Reasonableness of Regulations.— Whether a regulation of the board of state harbor commissioners changing the docking place of a steamboat company, and requiring it to land its passengers and freight at a different wharf from that to which it had previously been assigned, is unreasonable, is a conclusion of law, to be deduced by the court from the facts proved.</p> <p>Harbor Commissioners—Restraining Regulations.—In an Action to Enjoin the state harbor commissioners from enforcing a resolution requiring plaintiff steamboat company to change its landing place from the C. wharf to the M. wharf, four hundred yards distant, it appeared that nearly all the freight carried by plaintiff and its competitors consisted of wheat and flour, which the shippers generally required should be delivered at the B. and C. wharves, near which the market for produce of this kind had been established for more than ten years; that, as there was no sale for such produce at or near the M. wharf, carriers could not procure it as freight to be delivered there; that there was active competition for freight between plaintiff and another carrier, which had a landing place at the B. wharf; that said order, if executed, would discriminate against plaintiff, to its great detriment, and compel it to suspend business as a carrier of freight on that route; and that, though the C. wharf was overcrowded, there were boats, other than plaintiff’s, which might be removed without prejudice to their interests. Held, that the resolution was unreasonable, and its execution would be enjoin