question about which doubts have been suggested, but which it is not necessary for me to decide at this time.)

It may also be conceded that where railroad companies do provide such second class passenger transportation, the Railroad Commissioners would have the same right to make schedules of the maximum rates of fare to be charged for such second class transportation as they have to fix the maximum rates of fares to be charged for first class transportation. Every railroad corporation doing business in this State is required to provide reasonable accommodation for the convenience and safety of pas sengers, and for every willful neglect to provide the same shall forfeit not less than five nor more than twenty dollars, to be recovered in an action against said corporation. (Gen. R. R. Act, § 90.)

But I do not find any provision of the law which requires railroad companies to furnish "second class " transportation of inferior accommodation for passengers, any more than they are required to furnish extra or superior accommodation, such as parlor cars or sleeping cars.

While the Railroad Commissioners have the authority to fix the rates of passenger fares which shall be deemed reasonable, I do not find that the Jaw gives them the authority to require the railroad companies to furnish different classes of transportation for passengers at different rates. It will scarcely be claimed that the Railroad Commissioners have the authority to require a railroad company to furnish superior accommodation on its trains, (such as parlor, drawing room or sleeping cars,) even for an extra charge, for the convenience of some passengers who desire such extra accommodation and are willing to pay for it, irrespective of whether the demand for such extra accommodation is sufficient to induce the railroad to provide it. It would seem to be equally unreasonable to contend that the Railroad Commissioners have the authority to require a railroad company to provide inferior accommodation (or "second class" cars) for the convenience of those who desire to travel at less than the maximum fares, irrespective of whether the amount received for such second class travel will be sufficient to warrant the railroad company in furnishing it.

Section 45 of the General Railroad Act of February 9, 1882, provides that the Railroad Commissioner may give information to any railroad company of such improvements and changes as he considers reasonable and expedient to promote the convenience and accommodation of the public, and upon the failure of the railroad company to adopt such suggestions the Commissioner shall take such legal proceedings as he may deem expedient. This Act did not give authority to the Railroad Commissioner to make schedules of fares and regulation of passenger tariffs, and I do not think this Section affects the question now submitted.

I am, therefore, of opinion that, although the Railroad Commissioners may have the authority under the law to fix for the railroad corporations doing business in this State second class passenger rates, in cases in which second class cars are provided by the companies, the Railroad Commissioners have not the authority to require the said railroads to furnish such second class accommodation.

I cannot advise the Railroad Commissioners to exercise a power which it is at least doubtful if they possess, especially within a few weeks of the meeting of the Legislature. If the Commissioners are of opinion that the failure of the railroad companies to furnish second class passenger accommodation is an evil which requires correction, they should represent the matter to the Legislature, that such legislation may be had as will correct it.

Respectfully,

CH. RICHARDSON MILES,
Attorney General.

The Legislature reflects the interests and opinion of the customers of the railroads in all parts of the State and from their constituents, and by their own observation, the representatives of the people will doubtless derive all the information needed, and enable them to make such amend. ments in the law as may be requisite in the matter of second class passenger rates and accommodation.

Freight Rules. Since these rules were issued Rule 1 has (by Section 2, Circular 8,) had the following added to it: "Stations not over two (2) miles beyond the upper limit of any ten (10) mile group may be included in such group." This was done to meet certain difficulties to which the attention of the Board had been called.

RULE 3. "In the application of the Standard Freight Tariff' for purposes of transportation, main lines, branches and connecting railroads, when operated together or controlled by one company, shall be regarded as parts of one road, and the rates shall be computed as upon parts of one and the same road."

This rule embodies the requirements of the law, and the roads to which it should apply were designated in Circular 4, issued with the Standard Freight Tariff, as follows:

OFFICE OF RAILROAD COMMISSIONERS,
COLUMBIA, S. C., August 23, 1883.

Freight Rule 3 shall apply in the following cases:

1. To all freight passing from one point to another anywhere on the Columbia and Greenville Railroad and its branches, the Laurens Railway, and the Spartanburg, Union and Columbia Railroad.

2. To all freight passing from one point to another anywhere on the South Carolina Railway and its branches and the Barnwell Railroad.

3. To all freight between points located either on the Wilmington, Columbia and Augusta Railroad or on the Northeastern Railroad and points on the Central Railroad, and also to freight passing from any point on either of these roads to any point on either of the other two via the third.

4. To all freight passing from one point to another anywhere on the Charleston and Savannah Railway and the Ashley River Railroad, and also to freight passing from any point on either of these roads via the Northeastern Railroad to and from Charleston.

By order of the Board:

M. T. BARTLETT, Secretary.

M. L. BONHAM, Chairman.

On receipt of this circular the General Manager of the Barnwell Railway claims that that road was not owned, operated or contriled by the South Carolina Railway, and pending the consideration of this communication the application of Rule 3 as to this road was suspended. A full report of this matter is appended hereto.

The application of Rule 3 has been confined to such roads as may be fairly regarded as combined under one management, and has not been extended to systems embracing a number of really separate and distinct corporations merely united through having a common ownership or management, as, for example, the Richmoud and Danville system and the railroads constituting the Atlantic Coast Line. To have made this application of the rule would have inflicted se ious loss upon the roads affected by it. It has been the effort of the Commission in all cases to be just to the railroads and considerate of the public; and while they believe they have attained some success in this respect, they are conscious of the necessary imperfections of their work, and regard with satisfaction that provision of the law which gives them power to modify their rates and regulations from time to time.

Complaints.-The Commission deem it proper further to call the attention of the Legislature and of the people generally to the rule adopted by the Commission of receiving and acting only upon complaints submitted in writing and signed with the name of some responsible party. The Commission has no intention of making an appeal to it difficult, and therefore no forms are required. The simplest complaint stated in the most informal language, signed by any responsible party, is sufficient. The Commission recognize the fact that they are to give speedy determination to matters which reach the merits of all questions without much regard to form. But it is eminently proper that, constituting as they do a quasi judicial body, a complaint should be made in such a form as would enable the Commissioners to give the data of the complaint when thereunto requested before they should call upon the railroads for explanation. It is deemed advisable to make this mention of the rule, because there seems to be an impression with some persons that the Commissioners will or should act upon mere hearsay without their aid being regularly invoked. A large number of complaints in proper form have reached the Commission, all of which have been promptly acted upon.

It is neither necessary nor expedient to burden this Report with the details of controversies and misunderstandings between the Commission and some of the railroad representatives. Such were perhaps unavoidaable under the circumstances, but most of them have been satisfactorily justed; and the Commission have reason to be gratified at the spirit f accommodation and concession exhibited by most of the corporations with which their duties have brought them into novel and difficult relations.

It must also be confessed that the members of the Commission have felt very strongly the force of what has been well expressed by Mr. Charles Francis Adams in speaking of the Board of Railroad Commissioners of the State of Massachusetts:

"The country did not contain any trained body of men competent to do this work. They had got to be found and educated. In the next place the work was one of great difficulty and extreme delicacy. The Commissioners were to represent the Government in a momentous struggle with the most compact and formidable interest in the country. They were to be pitted against the ablest men the community could supply, thoroughly acquainted with their business and with unlimited resources at their disposal. Finally, the test of success was to be that under these circumstances, and in the face of these difficulties, the Commission should develop the crude original laws placed in their hands into a rational and effective system."

This sense of their inexperience impressed upon them arduous labors and a conscientious diffidence in doubtful cases; and now, after an experience of less than twelve months, they do not feel sufficient confidence in their mastery of the subject to warrant suggestions upon their part looking to the material modification of existing laws.

The Complaints not finally disposed of by our predecessors are

1st. Town Council of Darlington vs. the Cheraw and Darlington Railroad.

This case, as far as depot accommodation at that point is concerned, has been satisfactorily ended by a compliance on the part of the Railroad Company with the decision of the Commission, as will be seen by the following correspondence. The question of rates on freight has also been disposed of by the "Standard Freight Tariff."

DARLINGTON C. H., March 16th, 1883. To the Honorable M. L. BONHAM, T. B. JETER and L. J. WALKER, Railroad Commissioners of South Carolina.

GENTLEMEN: The undersigned, composing the Intendant and Wardens of the town of Darlington, hereby respectfully complain of and call your attention to the following facts:

1st. Last year we made formal complaint to the Railroad Commissioner of South Carolina of the injury done to this town by the unjust and oppressive manner in which the Cheraw and Darlington Railroad Company conducted the business of its road at this point. An investigation was held in accordance with law, and our complaints were adjudged by the Railroad Commissioner to be well founded, and notice thereof was duly given to the railroad company. To that complaint, on file in your office, we beg respectfully to refer you.

We see no appreciable change in the action of the railroad company. It is true that a few additional chairs have been placed in the two rooms occupied as offices by the Depot Agent and Express Agent, but with this exception we see no change and no improvement. Our town still suffers from the same want of convenience and accommodation at the depot, and, in seasons of pressure, from the same difficulty and delay in the reception and delivery of freight, and from the same high and unreasonable rates of freight charges. The discrimination in charges made between this place and the town of Timmonsville, on the line of the Wilmington, Columbia and Augusta Railroad, still exists, although the two places are equidistant from the city of Charleston, and there can be no more trouble or expense in the transportation of freight from the city of Charleston to the one point than to the other.