sion of this road is the garden spot of California. This road, if thus completed, would be a blessing to the State, and Central California would loom up with Los Angeles and San Diego. Shall you stop all this improvement? Will you say that if rates are cut that prudent business men will still invest in an unpaying enterprise? Nay, gentlemen. The rights and wishes of this State demand of you that these contemplated improvements shall be cherished, and that you shall aid them, not destroy them; that you shall foster and encourage them, not smother and defeat them. We of the Salinas Valley see down the vista of the future and behold our country growing into greatness, our towns springing into cities, our population vastly increased, our mines of coal and iron developed, our great land holdings divided, and our mountain slopes and small valleys peopled and dotted with beautiful and happy homes. We know we have a climate unsurpassed, a soil rich and productive, a county vast in extent, and we stand waiting and hoping to see this road extended and a coast route opened to public travel. But if this or similar orders are made by this honorable Commission, we feel that a great obstacle will be thrown in our way of progress. We, therefore, respectfully ask that this order be annulled, and this company be allowed every advantage which shall strengthen its ability to aid the upbuilding of this part of the State.

CONCLUSION,

We, therefore, conclude that we have shown by the evidence before this honorable Commission, that great injustice would be done this company by the enforcement of this order: and that it appears that at all times this company has ever been ready to reduce freight rates on its own motion, and that the judgment of this company is the best guide to a correct conclusion in the question of freight rates. This company stands to-day a mighty factor in the progress of the State. It has stood the hard times of the past. It has borne the difficulties of being the pioneer road, and has invested millions of capital in anticipation of the time when that investment should be profitable, and now, as soon as the time hoped for is near at hand, and the horizon of doubt and fear is clearing up under the sunshine of the State's prosperity, is it to be robbed of the fruits of its labor, the reward of its enterprise? Who has the temerity to engage in vast enterprises when it is known that the moment the enterprise is at that point where profit legitimately belongs to it, that the reward shall be taken away? Taken, too, without a reason! Taken only to show power so to do! We cannot believe that the effect of this order was thoroughly considered by this honorable Commission, and we have too much faith and trust in the known probity of themembers of this honorable body to believe that after our showing this order will be enforced. We, therefore, leave the matter with you, in full confidence that this order will be abrogated-your schedule withdrawn-and that the rates of freight traffic on this line will remain at rest until a public exigency or the prosperity of this road shall make a reduction necessary.

Yours respectfully,

GEIL & MOREHOUSE, Attorneys for Southern Pacific Company (Northern Division).

LETTER FROM JULIUS LEE.

WATSONVILLE, Cal., June 9, 1888.

V. W. GASKILL, Esq., Secretary:

DEAR SIR: Replying to your favor of the fourth instant, making inquiry as to whether our people are satisfied with the reduction the Southern Pacific Railroad Company has made in its special tariff on hay and straw in carloads, making a reduction on former tariff, as is claimed, of from 10 to 50 per cent, and intimating that the Commissioners are of the opinion that that is all we have ever claimed or asked for, I have to say that after making such inquiry as I have been able from our farmers and producers, and especially from the warehousemen who have kept the warehouses here for many years past, the tariff on said commodities is virtually and practically of no consideration whatever here. The warehouseman has promised to give me the exact figures from the books as to the amount of said articles shipped from here to San Francisco, which he has not yet done, but he assures me the amount is very trivial, indeed, and this comports with my own observation and all the information I can obtain from others.

By reference to the written complaint filed in the case, it will be seen that we complain that freights generally are too high; meaning, of course, freights on commodities in which we deal or are interested; but more especially we complained that in these respects the people of Watsonville and its vicinity were unjustly discriminated against. We thought the railroad company should not charge more for carrying a given commodity than it charged others for carrying the same article twenty or thirty miles further. We claimed that this was a discrimination prohibited by the Constitution and law of the State. But more especially did we, and do we, complain of the want of depot facilities. I believe that our fruit and berry producers are now very considerably better accommodated by the way in which freight trains run, than formerly, and for this we, of course, are willing to give all credit; but really the depot facilities are in no manner improved, and as harvest is again soon coming on, if said facilities are not increased, many thousand tons of cereals and other farm products will have to be this year, as last, hauled right past our warehouse door away around into Monterey County to a steamer landing. The approximate amount that was so hauled last year, and will have to be this, cannot now be given. I

can assure you that it is large, and must necessarily be large, until the proper facilities are afforded here for shipping, and this, I report, is now our greatest cause for complaint. I believe there is no especial complaint now on account of passenger fares since the reduction, and for this, of course, we are very thankful. But that the Commissioners should have thought that the reduction on hay and straw would benefit us, I cannot understand. The railroad company, when they made it, must have known that it did not concern us more than a reduction on granite, for instance, would have done.

Yours truly,

Northern Division case now awaits decision of the Board.

JULIUS LEE.

ROBINSON VS. SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY ET AL.

At a regular meeting of the Board, held on February 27, 1888, the case of W. H. Robinson vs. Southern Pacific Company et al. came on for hearing, the Attorney-General appearing on behalf of plaintiff. After argument at length of the said case, the Attorney-General took the position that the case as it now stood could not be won in a higher Court; and, in consequence, he recommended that W. H. Robinson commence a new action. W. H. Robinson, being present, said that he would at once commence a new action.

The complaint, summons, return of service of summons, and demurrer of Southern Pacific Company and demurrer of South Pacific Coast Railway Company are as follows:

COMPLAINT.

Before the Honorable Board of Railroad Commissioners of the State of California.

W. H. ROBINSON, Plaintiff,

VS.

SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY (a corporation), and

SOUTH PACIFIC COAST RAILWAY COMPANY (a corporation), Defendants,}

The above named plaintiff complains of the defendants above named, and for cause of complaint alleges:

I. That he is now, and at all the times hereinafter mentioned was, a resident of the State of California, to wit: a resident of the City of Alameda, in said State.

II. Upon information and belief that the Southern Pacific Company, a defendant herein, is, and was at all the times hereinafter mentioned, a railroad corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of Kentucky, engaged in the business of a common carrier of passengers within said State of California upon the railroad and ferry lines, and between the places as hereinafter mentioned.

III. That the defendant, South Pacific Coast Railway Company, is, and was at all the times hereinafter mentioned, since on or about the twenty-third day of May, A. D. 1887, a railroad corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, engaged in the business of a common carrier of passengers within said State of California upon the railroad and ferry lines, and between the places as hereinafter mentioned.

IV. That the Central Pacific Railroad Company is, and was at all times hereinafter mentioned, a railroad corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, engaged in the business of a common carrier of passengers within the State of California, upon the railroad and ferry lines and between the places as hereinafter mentioned.

V. That for more than six years prior to its consolidation, on the twenty-third day of May, 1887, as hereinafter set forth, the South Pacific Coast Railroad Company was a railroad corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, engaged in the business of a common carrier of passengers within said State of California upon the railroad and ferry lines as hereinafter mentioned.

VI.-Upon information and belief, that on or about the twenty-third day of May, 1887, the said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, and various other corporations owning connecting railroad and ferry lines in the State of California, did consolidate their capital stock, debts, liabilities, property, assets, and franchises into a new corporation then and there and thereby created, and named and designated South Pacific Coast Railway Company, a defendant herein; and that all of said railroad and ferry lines between San Francisco and Oakland, and between San Francisco and Alameda, formerly owned and operated by said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, are now, and, ever since said twenty-third day of May, 1887, have been the property and subject to the control and management of defendant, South Pacific Coast Railway Company. That such management and control of said railroad and ferry lines by said last mentioned company,

was exclusive between said twenty-third day of May, 1887, and the first day of July, 1887, when upon said last named date, defendant, South Pacific Coast Railway Company, claimed to lease to defendant, Southern Pacific Company, for the term of fifty-five years, from the first day of July, 1887, all of said railroad and ferry lines formerly owned and operated by said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company; and said Southern Pacific Company does now, and ever since said first day of July, 1887, has. by virtue of said alleged lease, been in possession of, managed, and operated said railroad and ferry lines last mentioned, and does now establish, charge, and collect, and ever since said first day of July, 1887, has established, charged, and collected, fares from passengers on said last mentioned railroad and ferry lines, to wit: The railroad and ferry lines formerly owned and operated by the South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, between San Francisco and Oakland and San Francisco and Alameda. And plaintiff alleges, upon information and belief, that the management and operation of said last mentioned railroad and ferry lines, and the establishment of the passenger rates thereon by defendant, Southern Pacific Company, is now, and ever since the first day of July, 1887, has been, subject to the supervision and control of defendant, South Pacific Coast Railway Company, and that the true relation of said corporations in regard to the management and operation of said railroad and ferry lines is that of principal and agent.

VII. That prior to January, 1887, the said Central Pacific Railroad Company, the competitor of said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, as hereinafter stated, was leased to defendant, Southern Pacific Company, and ever since said lease the defendant, Southern Pacific Company, has been in possession of, operated, and managed all the railroad and ferry lines belonging to said Central Pacific Railroad Company, including its said railroad and ferry lines between San Francisco and Oakland, and between San Francisco and Alameda, and does now establish, charge, and collect, and ever since said lease has established, charged, and collected, fares from passengers on the railroad and ferry lines owned and formerly operated by said Central Pacific Railroad Company.

VIII-That prior to 1884, said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company and said Central Pacific Railroad Company were, upon their respective lines of railroad and ferries, common carriers of passengers between the City of San Francisco and the town of Alameda, the last named corporation being also such common carrier between said San Francisco, said Alameda, and the City of Oakland, and both of said last named companies then maintained the same rates of passenger fare between said San Francisco and said Alameda. That on or about the early part of the year 1884, said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company extended its railroad and business as a common carrier of passengers into said City of Oakland, and thereupon became, and thereafter was, a competing railroad and common carrier with said Central Pacific Railroad Company between said San Francisco and Oakland, and between San Francisco and Alameda. That prior to November, 1884, both of said last mentioned railroad companies had sold to the public for $3 a so called monthly commutation ticket that entitled the holder to as many daily round trips between the places named on it, to wit: between San Francisco and Oakland, and between San Francisco and Alameda, as there were days in the month for which it was issued. Among the printed conditions on such tickets was one that read: "Good for one round trip daily from first to thirty-first of," giving name of month.

That for a year or more previous to November, 1884, the said Central Pacific Railroad Company, without any change in the words of the rule on its tickets," good for one round trip daily during the month of," began giving passengers on these tickets more favorable conditions, by allowing more than one round trip daily, by punching dates in advance. That previous to November, 1884, said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, without any change in the wording of the rule on its tickets, "good for one round trip daily from first to thirty-first of for the purpose of competing with the Central Pacific Railroad Company, did lower its rates of fare, giving the holders of these tickets as many round trips as there were days in the month, to be taken, at the option of the holder, one or more daily; and said rates of fare are just and reasonable to defendants, being full remuneration for the service rendered, and were just and fair to said competing companies.

That for some time before, and continuously since November, 1884, until March 1, 1887, said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company had allowed all holders of its monthly commutation tickets as many rides as there were days in the month, one or more daily, without any change in the printing on tickets, "good for one round trip daily from first to thirty-first of," giving name of month.

IX.-That on or about the fourteenth day of February, 1887, said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company and defendant, Southern Pacific Company, then managing and operating the railroad and ferry lines of said Central Pacific Railroad Company, as hereinbefore set forth, by mutual agreement and joint notice, signed by the officers of both roads, dated February 14, 1887, and provided to take effect March 1, 1887, increased their said rates of fare between said places by allowing only one trip each day to the holder of a monthly commutation ticket, and compelling the holder of said ticket to lose all trips not so taken; that the said competition between said companies ceased on said first day of March, 1887, and that the cessation of said competition and the giving of said notice were done in pursuance of the mutual agreement of said companies made on or about said fourteenth day of February, 1887, that such competition should cease, and that both of said companies should come under one management, to wit: under the management of the defendant, Southern Pacific Company, and which common management was consummated, as hereinbefore stated.

X. That the defendant South Pacific Coast Railway Company, succeeding to the property, franchises, and liabilities of said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, on the twenty-third of May, 1887, as aforesaid, and notwithstanding said reduction of rates by reason of competition as aforesaid, has ever since said last named day, and does now increase said rates and enforce said order of February 14, 1887, and ever since said twenty-third day of May, 1887, it has and does now require and compel each passenger and holder of said monthly commutation ticket carried by it between San Francisco and Oakland, or between San Francisco and Alameda, over the said railroad and ferry lines formerly operated by said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, to pay a rate of fare in excess of said competing rate by allowing to such ticket holder only one trip each day, and compelling him to lose all trips not so taken.

XI-That on the first day of June, 1887, plaintiff paid defendant, South Pacific Coast Railway Company, $3 for the usual monthly commutation passenger ticket that entitled him to thirty round trips between Alameda and San Francisco, over the said railroad and ferry lines formerly operated by the said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, he having the right to take said trips at his option, for business or pleasure, one or more daily.

That during the said month of June plaintiff took twenty-three round trips on his said monthly ticket, and said last named defendant refused to let him have three more round trips demanded by him in said month of June, there being six or more unpunched trips on his ticket, and compelled him to pay 75 cents for said three trips. Previous to March first, plaintiff would have been permitted to take said three trips precisely as he demanded, without extra charge. That on the twenty-third day of said June said last named defendant carried plaintiff part of the distance from Alameda to San Francisco, on his monthly ticket, and had ample time and means to carry him the rest of the distance. The plaintiff then presented said ticket to said last named defendant at Alameda Mole, requesting to be carried the rest of the trip, but said last named defendant refused to carry him, and by force prevented him taking said trip, and compelled him to pay extra fare.

XII. That defendants, South Pacific Coast Railway Company and Southern Pacific Company, operating, as aforesaid, said railroad and ferry lines formerly operated by said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, notwithstanding said reduction of rates by reason of competition, as aforesaid, have, ever since the first of July, 1887, and do now increase said rates, and enforce said order of February 14, 1887, and ever since said first of July, 1887, they have required and do now require and compel each passenger and holder of said monthly commutation ticket carried by them between San Francisco and Oakland, or between San Francisco and Alameda, over the said railroad and ferry lines formerly operated by said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, to pay a rate of fare in excess of said competing rate, by allowing such ticket holder only one trip each day, and compelling him to lose all trips not so taken.

XIII. That on the first of October, 1887, plaintiff purchased of defendants, for the sum of $3 then paid defendants, a so called monthly commutation ticket for the said month of October, that entitled plaintiff to thirty-one round trips between Alameda and San Francisco over the said railroad and ferry lines formerly operated by the said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, he having the right by virtue of said previous reduction of said commutation rates, as aforesaid, to take said thirty-one trips at his option, one or more daily. That on October 24, 1887, plaintiff, after using said ticket for one round trip on that day, between San Francisco and Alameda, on said railroad and ferry lines so formerly operated by the said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, desired to take another round trip between San Francisco and Alameda, and for such round trip passage over the said last mentioned railroad and ferry lines, he did, on said last named day, present to defendants his said commutation ticket for the said month of October, but defendants, although there were then on said ticket at least six unpunched round trips, and although it had ample means and time to so transport plaintiff, and notwithstanding the reduction of said rate, as aforesaid, refused to allow plaintiff to take said second round trip on said ticket on said twenty-fourth of October, 1887, as aforesaid, and by force prevented plaintiff from taking such second round trip on said ticket on that day; whereupon, and by reason of said refusal, force, and violence, plaintiff was by defendants compelled to pay, and he did, by reason thereof, so pay defendants under protest, the sum of 25 cents for the said second round trip taken by him, as aforesaid, on said last named day over the said railroad and ferry lines then operated by defendants, and formerly operated by the South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, between San Francisco and Alameda.

XIV. That prior to the month of October, 1887, this plaintiff filed with this Board of Commissioners his complaint against said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, wherein he set forth substantially his grievances herein complained of in regard to the raising of said commutation rates above the said lower competing rates as hereinbefore stated, and the enforcement against plaintiff and the traveling public of such raised rates by said order of February 14, 1887, by said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, and by the Southern Pacific Company, a defendant herein, and thereafter, such proceedings were had and taken on said complaint in and by this Board that, on the nineteenth day of October, 1887, a judgment and decision was therein duly given and made by this Board, as follows:

"The Board decided that it had jurisdiction and proceeded to try the case.

"The evidence offered by the complainant shows to our full satisfaction that the custom of allowing more than one ride daily on said commutation tickets, was adopted for the purpose of competition, and any change in said tickets that was an increase of rates to the passenger is therefore a violation of Sec. 20, Art. XII of the Constitution, which says:

"That whenever a railroad corporation shall, for the purpose of competing with any other common carrier, lower its rates for transportation of passengers or freight, from one point to another, such reduced rates shall not be again raised or increased from such standard without the consent of the governmental authority in which shall be vested the power to regulate fares and freights.'

We, therefore, find in favor of the complainant, and order that said defendant, the South Pacific Coast Railroad Company, from and after this date, allow the holders of commutation tickets between Oakland and Alameda (places in Alameda County) and San Francisco as many rides as there are days in the month, taken as desired.

"P. J. WHITE, "Railroad Commissioner, Second District. "JAS. W. REA, "Railroad Commissioner, Third District."

That the subject-matter of the said former proceeding of this plaintiff, was substantially the same as that involved in this proceeding, involving the increase of rates over the same lines of travel and as to the same class of tickets as in this proceeding; that the defendants in this proceeding are substantially the same, and the successors in interest of the defendant in said former proceeding, and appear herein in the same capacity, to wit: as common carriers, the successors of the defendant in the former proceeding, over the same lines of railroad and ferries embraced in said former proceeding. That defendant, Southern Pacific Company, was a party to said notice of February 14, 1887, and to the increase of rates complained of in said former proceeding; that both of these defendants herein had actual notice of the pendency of said former proceeding, and that both of these defendants had notice of the said decision of this Board in said former proceeding, said notice, so plaintiff is informed and believes, having been served on the defendants herein immediately upon its rendition, on the nineteenth day of October, 1887, and before the illegal acts herein complained of as occurring on the twenty-fourth of said October, as set forth in paragraph XIII herein, and which said acts of defendants were in direct and open opposition to, and disobedience of, said decision of this Board, made by it on said nineteenth day of October, and of which these defendants had full knowledge as aforesaid.

XV.-Plaintiff further shows that the matters herein set forth and the grievances herein complained of, are of common and general interest to many, to wit: at least eight thousand persons, who are, and for several years past have been, using said monthly tickets; that said persons are too numerous to be joined as plaintiff's or defendants herein, and this plaintiff brings this proceeding for the benefit of himself and all such persons; and plaintiff alleges on information and belief that defendants have refused to allow any of the holders of said commutation tickets to take more than one round trip daily thereon, and that by reason of such refusal to this plaintiff and said persons, defendants have illegally extorted from them a sum of money which plaintiff avers on information and belief to be at least $1,000 per month.

XVI. That the said monthly commutation rate, lowered and adopted as aforesaid for purposes of competition, is now, and ever since the operation by these defendants or by either of them of said railroad and ferry lines formerly operated by said South Pacific Coast Railroad Company has been, to defendants a full, fair, and reasonable compensation for the service required therefor;

WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays this honorable Board:

I.-To summon said defendants to answer this complaint, and on coming in of said answer, to find and determine that the acts of defendants herein complained of are in violation of the Constitution and laws of the State; and plaintiff also prays that this honorable Board find and declare that the regulation and notice of defendants, dated February fourteenth, and which took effect March 1, 1887, and all other notices or instructions of the same import, given to defendants' servants, or enforced by any of them, were and are in violation of Article XII, Section 20, of the Constitution of this State, and null and void, and that plaintiff, and all other holders of said monthly commutation tickets, have been since March first, and now are entitled to all the rights and privileges they enjoyed on said tickets before that date, to wit: as many round trips as there are days in the month, at option of holder, one or more daily.

II.-That this honorable Board, under the authority vested in it by the Constitution and statutes of this State, do order and establish that the rate of fare that may be charged by the defendants, for carrying passengers between Oakland and Alameda (places in Alameda County) and San Francisco, shall not be more than $3, for as many round trips between the places named as there are days in the month, and that passengers may take these trips as they see fit, one or more daily during the month; and for general relief.

W. H. ROBINSON,
In propria persona,

1831 San Antonio Avenue, Alameda, Cal.