Story Case

The Sullivan, Decatur Interurban Railroad was a line running from Sullivan, Indiana, to Decatur, Illinois, crossing the Wabash River at Brownstown, contiguous to the tracks of the Ohio & Indiana Railroad Company. During the floods of 1912, the bridge of the interurban was washed away, and the company requested the Ohio & Indiana Railroad Company for the privilege of carrying its cars over the former's bridge. This request was refused, and the interurban railroad consulted its attorney concerning its rights. The attorney advised that the Ohio & Indiana Railroad Company was a common carrier, not only of freight in its own cars, but of the cars of other companies, such as those of the meat packing companies, oil companies, cattle car companies, and, since this was true, it must serve all who request its service, and, therefore, must carry the cars of the interurban company. Is this a correct statement of the law?

Ruling Court Case. Public Service Company Vs. American Lighting Company, Volume 132 Federal Reports, Page 794

The public corporation was the owner of the established gas works in Jersey City, from which it lighted the streets of the city under contract. The American company was the owner of a gas burner, which it wished to introduce for street lighting. The city of Jersey City, on December 1, 1914, advertised as usual for bids for lighting the city the next year. The bid of the American company was the lowest, and the contract was awarded to it. Thereupon, it demanded from the public corporation a supply of gas, delivered at the top of every lamp post in Jersey City, sufficient to supply one light each night. The American company asked for an injunction to compel such service. Judge Bradford rendered the opinion, holding that a competitor company, making such demand, was asking what the established corporation owed to no one acting in a like business capacity. The injunction was refused.

Ruling Law. Story Case Answer

It has been stated that a public service company is the employee of the people, and, therefore, must serve all who ask for its service. This, however, is subject to the qualification that it need not serve its competitor. Thus, an agent for a rival steamship line can be denied passage on a competing line, when it is his purpose to solicit business on the competitor's line. An irrigation company need not connect with its rival in the promotion of the latter's business. A telephone line need not give its rival switchboard service, and an interurban cannot compel a railroad line which it parallels, or with which it competes for traffic, to carry its cars. The attorney's advice, in the Story Case, is incorrect.