Stanley Forman Reed

“ The respondent takes the position that since Section IX not only requires the application of lower Arkansas rates to Texas consumers but provides that the gas company 'shall not be authorized or permitted to charge and collect any higher rate,' the Texas city has abdicated power to raise the Texas rates above the Arkansas rates. ”

“ Geller, did state that an ordinance on rates is a contract. [16] There had been a franchise with a fixed maximum rate. The municipality granted an increase. A citizen objected on the ground that the franchise, as a contract, bound the municipality and the utility to the agreed rate. The Court of Civil Appeals [17] held the rate section of the franchise was not a 'fixed contract' but a rate schedule, subject to the city's power of regulation by reason of Section 17 of Article 1 of the Texas Constitution, Vernon's Ann.St., forbidding uncontrollable grants of special privileges. ”

“ This flows from the words in Section IX 'place in any rates' less than the Texas ordinance rates.
The lower rates for Texas are to be effective only when the utility is 'finally compelled to, or should voluntarily, place in' effect the lower rates for Arkansas. When a rate is voluntarily placed in effect in Arkansas, the Texas consumers are immediately entitled to the same rate. ”

“ Texarkana, Texas, and Texarkana, Arkansas, are adjacent cities divided by the Arkansas-Texas state line. Respondent serves as a public utility for the distribution of gas in both cities. Because of the section just quoted, the Texas city undertook judicial action to secure gas for itself and its citizens at rates lower than those stated in other sections of the franchise. ”

“ Grain doors are required to prevent leakage of grain from the car while in transit. They are wooden barriers which must be placed inside the box car doors before loading and removed upon unloading. Before July 1, 1935, they were furnished and installed by carriers without separate charge. Effective that day, a tariff filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission continued the carriers' practice of furnishing the materials for grain doors but shifted the cost of installation to the shippers. ”

“ They declared that unless the shippers made unqualified arrangements pursuant to the terms of the tariff, cars would be furnished without the grain doors installed. This letter, dated July 15, 1935, evoked no reply. Between July 1, 1935, and February 29, 1936, the petitioners upon the orders of respondent supplied the Grain Company with 624 box cars for the shipment of grain in bulk. Before the cars were loaded, the petitioners installed the necessary grain doors. Bills, rendered monthly, charged the respondent $1.00 for each car. ”

“ It awarded reparation to those who has paid $1.00 per car and authorized the carriers to waive collection of the amount over $.60 per car from shippers who had not paid. [8] The only relief afforded respondent by the Commission's decision is a right to reparation for all payments over $.60 per car. [9] The voluntary reduction of their claim by the petitioners is a sensible adjustment of their right to recover the tariff charge and of their obligation to make reparation to the extent that it is unreasonable. ”

“ The dominant elements are the responsibility for and the amount of the charge. These are fixed by the tariff. The letter of July 2, 1935, from the shippers required the installation of the grain doors and the respective orders for the separate cars, given thereafter, were given in the light of this demand for cars so equipped. We think this was an arrangement under the tariff. On July 2, 1935, the respondent clearly signified its desire for cars fully coopered and ready for loading. ”

“ City of Texarkana, Texas, 97 F.2d 5.↑ 305 U.S. 584, 59 S.Ct. 94, 83 L.Ed. --, October 10, 1938.↑ Sec. 160. 'The rights of the City of Texarkana in the use of the public streets, alleys, squares, parks, bridges and all public places are hereby declared to be inalienable to any person, firm or corporation, except by license permit and franchise passed by the city council on the affirmative vote of three-fifths of all the members of said council elected.'↑ Sec. 196. ”

“ St. Cloud Public Service Co. v. St. Cloud, 265 U.S. 352, 44 S.Ct. 492, 68 L.Ed. 1050; Henderson Water Co. v. Corp. Comm'n, 269 U.S. 278, 46 S.Ct. 112, 70 L.Ed. 273; see Southern Iowa Elec. Co. v. Chariton, 255 U.S. 539, 542, 41 S.Ct. 400, 401, 65 L.Ed. 764; Paducah v. Paducah Ry. ”

“ Pittsburgh, C., C. & St. L.R. Co. v. Fink, 250 U.S. 577, 40 S.Ct. 27, 63 L.Ed. 1151; New York Cent. & H. Riv. R. Co. v. York & Whitney Co., 256 U.S. 406, 41 S.Ct. 509, 65 L.Ed. 1016.↑ Chicago Board of Trade v. ”