City & Suburban R. R. Co. v. Washington, Westminster & Gettysburg R. R. Co.

⁶⁵⁶ Boyd, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The questions involved in this appeal have in effect been disposed of by the opinion filed at this term in the case of the Mayor and Common Council of Hyattsville v. Washington, Westminster and Gettysburg R. R. Co., post, p. 660. The principal question argued in this ease was whether there should have been an order for condemnation against the appellant before the Public Service Commission had determined whether there could be a crossing at grade. The statutes of this State are in more or less confusion as h> the proper procedure in cases such as this.

In section 306 of Article 23, of the Code, it is provided that: “Every railroad company of this State, heretofore or hereafter incorporated, wherever it shall find it necessary in the construction of its railroad or any lateral branch, is hereby authorized to cross at, under or over grade any railroad now or hereafter constructed;” that section then provides that if the companies can not agree “as to the compensation and terms upon which such crossing or crossings shall be made,” the company may condemn the easement of such crossing or crossings in the mode provided for the condemnation of the lands of individuals in and by section 269 of that article. It then provides' that if the crossing be at grade, the crossing company shall, at its own expense erect a proper signal station and keep a watchman at the crossing, and that the trains of the company crossed shall have precedence over those of the crossing company; and that if the crossings be under or over grade they shall be so constructed as not to interfere with the passage of trains of the first company. In 1910 (Chapter 180) what is known as the Public Service Commission Act was passed, and embraces sections 413-468, inclusive, of Article 23 of the Code of 1912. There is nothing in that statute which in terms authorizes the commission to determine whether a railroad crossing should be at, or above or under grade.

There, is no express reference in it to railroad crossings — either over other railroads or public ⁶⁵⁷ streets or roads. The provisions most, relied on by the appellant are those in sec. 438 of Art. 23' (sec. 26 of Oh. 180 of the Acts of 1910), which provide that: “Bo common carrier, railroad corporation or street railroad corporation, shall begin the construction of a railroad or street railroad, or any extension thereof, or exercise any franchise or right under any provision of the railroad law, or of any other law not heretofore lawfully exercised, without first having obtained the permission and approval of the commission. The commission shall have power to grant the permission and approval herein specified when ever it shall, after due hearing, determine that such construction or such exercise of the franchise or privilege is necessary or convenient for the public sendee.” And by section 55 of the Act, of 1910, it is enacted, that all acts and parts of acts conflicting or inconsistent with any provision of that Act were thereby repealed so far as they conflicted or were inconsistent with it. Section 438 is undoubtedly very broad, and it would seem to be necessary to obtain the permission and approval of the commission in order to exercise the right given by section 306 of Article 23, which is a part of the railroad law of the State, although of course its action is subject to section 423, which provides that “Any company, corporation, asscxdation, person or partnership, subject, to any of the provisions of this sub-title, or other person or party in interest, shall have the right to, proceed in the courts to vacate, set aside, or have modified any order of said commission on the grounds that such order is unreasonable or unlawful, as hereinafter more particularly set forth,” and section 457 and the succeeding section relate to the procedure.

While the statutes referred to were in the Code, Chapter 117 of Acts of 1912, adding a new article on Eminent Domain, was passed. Bo reference is made in it to the Public Service Commission Act, and section 7 provides that. “The State, and any municipal or other corporation, commission, board, body or person, which