Page images
PDF
EPUB

property of railroads, etc., by men who have been members of their respective boards for periods of ten to fifteen years, was of great advantage to newly created commissions.

Our state was honored by the National Association in the assignment of one member of the Montana Commission on one of the important committees, viz: Railroad taxation and plans for ascertaining fair valuation of rail

road property.

CONCLUSION.

One of the chief benefits, if indeed not the greatest advantage to the citizens of the State by the creation of a board of railroad commissioners, is in having a tribunal with comprehensive powers whose offices are always open, ready to receive and act upon any application within its authority, thus establishing an official medium whereby the public can obtain prompt attention and adjustment of any grievance as to service rendered by the common carriers. It has been the experience of the Montana Railroad Commission that a very large percentage of complaints, can be satisfactorily adjusted at enforced conferences between shippers and carriers, thus expediting the result, always having in reserve the authority to order formal proceedings in the premises.

Respectfully submitted,

B. T. STANTON, Chairman,
NATHAN GODFREY,
E. A MORLEY.

Commissioners.
H. K. Howry, Secretary.

[ocr errors]

COMPLAINTS.

The following complaint briefs, numbered from 1 to 91 inclusive, will furnish an idea of the variety of subjects submitted to the Commission and the disposition of the same. In addition to the complaints here listed, there have been a great number of matters laid before the Commission and satisfactorily disposed of, which were not of sufficent importance to enter as formal complaints.

It will be noted that but a small percentage of the complaints are open or pending; also, that the great majority of cases have been disposed of to the satisfaction of the complainants, thus indicating that requests to the Commission are, for the most part, entirely reasonable.

NO. 1. FORMAL.

ROBERT B. SMITH,

VS.
NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY Co.

Subject: Failure to announce departure of trains.
Result: Matter disposed of to satisfaction of complainant.
Complaint filed March 22nd, 1907.
Matter arranged April 29th, 1907.

On March 22nd, 1907, Robert B. Smith of Bigfork, filed complaint requesting that the departure of trains be announced at Missoula station.

Upon the matter being taken up with officials of the Northern Pacific Railway Company it was arranged to have trains announced hereafter.

NO. 2. FORMAL.

R. R. BROTHERHOOD JOINT LEGISLATIVE BOARD,

VS.

RAILROAD COMPANIES IN MONTANA.

Subject: Violation of Train-man's Hour Law, so called.

Result: Law held valid by Supreme Court, Northern Pacific Railway Co. fined.

Complaint filed April 9th, 1907.
Matter closed February 26th, 1908.

April 9th, 1907, the Railroad Brotherhood's Joint Legislative Board at Great Falls through its Chairman T. F. Richardson filed complaint against Railroad Companies in Montana for violating the law under. Chapter 5, Session Laws of 1907, known as the "Trainman's Hour Law."

The Commission' secured evidence of violation of the law in question by the Northern Pacific Railway Company and requested the Attorney General to bring suit in the District Court of Lewis and Clark County. The Railway Company was found guilty and fined $100.00. The District Court was afterward affirmed by decision of the Supreme Court, on an appeal by the defendant Railway Company.

NO. 3. FORMAL.

ORDER OF RAILWAY CONDUCTORS,

VS.

GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY.

Subject: Violation of Trainman's Hour Law, so called.
Result: Law held valid by Supreme Court.
Complaint filed April 17th, 1907.
Matter closed February 26th, 1908.

On April 17th, 1907, the Order of Railway Conductors at Great Falls, through its secretary, Otto Bjornstad, made complaint against the Great Northern Railway Company for violation of Chapter 5, Session Laws of 1907, known as the Trainman's Hour Law.

The Commission having requested the Attorney General to bring suit against the Northern Pacific Railway Co. under Complaint No. 2, such suit to be a test case, this complaint was held in abeyance. See Complaint No. 2.

NO. 4. FORMAL.
GEOFFREY LAVELLE,

VS.
OREGON SHORT LINE R. R. Co.

Subject: Cattle guards, Divide Station, also blocking of crossing at same point.

Result: Cattle guards put in, orders issued to keep crossings clear.
Complaint filed April 30th, 1907.
Matter adjusted June 6th, 1907.

Under date of April 30th, 1907, complaint was filed against the Oregon Short Line Railroad Co. by Geoffrey Lavelle, setting forth that at Divide station the Railroad Company had not provided sufficient cattle guards to protect livestock; also that crossings at the same station were frequently blocked by trains of the defendant Railroad Company for periods of 30 minutes or more.

Upon the matter being taken up with F. D. Wilson, D. F. & P. A., it was arranged to put in additional cattle guards and to have orders issued to keep road crossings clear.

NO. 5. FORMAL.

BOULDER LIME Co.,

VS.

NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY Co.

Subject: Construction of spur.

Result: Concessions gained; but on request of complainant, matter dismissed.

Complaint filed May 8th, 1907.
Dismissed on request of Complainant.

May 8th, 1907, the Boulder Lime Co. made complaint with rel rence to construction of a spur track by the Northern Pacific Railway Co. at the complainant's lime quarry on the Elkhorn branch.

The Commission submitted the matter to officials of the defendant Railway Company and secured concessions asked for, but afterward the complainant requested that the subject be dismissed.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]

Subject: Request for station and agent at Roberts.
Result: Matter closed without action.
Complaint filed May 9th, 1907.
Matter closed account Complainant not replying to letters.

Under date of May 9th, 1907, A. S. Gass of Roberts, filed complaint asking that the Northern Pacific Railway Company provide a station and agent at Roberts.

The Commission at once took the matter up, but being unable to hear further from the complainant with certain information necessary, although several letters were addressed him, the complaint was closed.

[ocr errors]

NO. 7. FORMAL.

THOMPSON FALLS MERCANTILE Co.

VS.
NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.

Subject: Discontinuance of service at Creist's Spur.

Result: The defendant Railway Company upon request of the Commission continued to receive business at the Spur mentioned.

Complaint filed June 13th, 1907.
Matter adjusted without order to the satisfaction of the complainant.

The complainant in petition stated that it had about fifty car loads of cedar material for loading at Creist's Spur of the Northern Pacific Railway Company and that defendant Company had refused to accept orders for empty cars to be placed for loading on the Spur mentioned; such refusal working a great hardship and inconvenience upon the complainant.

The subject was taken up with officials of the Northern Pacific Railway Company with the result that the defendant company continued to receive business on the spur mentioned, until the complainant had been able to move out its product.

NO. 8. FORMAL.

JAMES Ivey,

VS.
GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY.

[ocr errors]

Subject: Agency at Frazer, Montana.

Result: On investigation the Commission held that the business transacted at Frazer did not warrant the establishing of a Station and Agency.

Complaint filed June 28th, 1907.
Matter dismissed July 22nd, 1907.

On June 28th, 1907, James Ivey, a dealer in general merchandise at Frazer, Montana, filed complaint with the Commission requesting that a depot be opened at the point mentioned and an Agent installed therein. The Commission requested the Great Northern Railway Company to furnish figures showing the freight and passenger earnings at Frazer and such data was accordingly submitted by the defendant Railway Company.

It was shown that for the period between July, 1906, and April, 1907, inclusive, the total revenue derived from passenger business was $196.60, while the freight revenue for the same months amounted to $86.02.

The complainant was advised that in view of the limited amount of business at Frazer station, the Commission did not feel warranted in making

« PreviousContinue »