FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245  
246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   >>   >|  
n he recites the following facts: "In Arizona, approximately 93% of the freight traffic and 95% of the passenger traffic is interstate. Because of the Train Limit Law appellant is required to haul over 30% more trains in Arizona than would otherwise have been necessary. The record shows a definite relationship between operating costs and the length of trains, the increase in length resulting in a reduction of operating costs per car. The additional cost of operation of trains complying with the Train Limit Law in Arizona amounts for the two railroads traversing that State to about $1,000,000 a year. The reduction in train lengths also impedes efficient operation. More locomotives and more manpower are required; the necessary conversion and reconversion of train lengths at terminals and the delay caused by breaking up and remaking long trains upon entering and leaving the state in order to comply with the law, delays the traffic and diminishes its volume moved in a given time, especially when traffic is heavy. "At present the seventy freight car laws are enforced only in Arizona and Oklahoma, with a fourteen car passenger car limit in Arizona. The record here shows that the enforcement of the Arizona statute results in freight trains being broken up and reformed at the California border and in New Mexico, some distance from the Arizona line. Frequently it is not feasible to operate a newly assembled train from the New Mexico yard nearest to Arizona, with the result that the Arizona limitation governs the flow of traffic as far east as El Paso, Texas. For similar reasons the Arizona law often controls the length of passenger trains all the way from Los Angeles to El Paso. "If one State may regulate train lengths, so may all the others, and they need not prescribe the same maximum limitation. The practical effect of such regulation is to control train operations beyond the boundaries of the State exacting it because of the necessity of breaking up and reassembling long trains at the nearest terminal points before entering and after leaving the regulating State. The serious impediment to the free flow of commerce by the local regulation of train lengths and the practical necessity that such regulation, if any, must be prescribed by a single body having a nation-wide authority are apparent. "The trial court found that the Arizona law had no reasonable relation to safety, and made train operation more dangerous. Examinat
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245  
246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Arizona

 
trains
 

traffic

 
lengths
 
freight
 

operation

 

passenger

 

length

 
regulation
 
operating

breaking
 

necessity

 

leaving

 

entering

 

practical

 

reduction

 

required

 

Mexico

 
limitation
 
nearest

record

 

feasible

 

regulate

 

operate

 

reasons

 

governs

 
similar
 
controls
 

result

 
Angeles

assembled

 
prescribed
 

single

 
dangerous
 
commerce
 

reasonable

 
apparent
 

authority

 

safety

 
relation

nation

 

impediment

 

boundaries

 

Examinat

 

exacting

 

operations

 
control
 

maximum

 

effect

 

regulating