Amend. 14.-Rights of Citizens Sec. 1.-Due Process-Police Power elevator erected adjacent to its right of way is invalid, because it does not provide for indemnity for what it requires. Missouri Pac. R. Co. v. Nebraska, 217 U. S. 196. Lake Erie, etc., R. Co. v. State, 249 U. S. 422. Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Minneapolis, etc., Assn., 247 U. S. 490. Louisiana v. Morgan's Co., 264 U. S. 393. Railroad right of way for telegraph line.-Congressional legislation has not deprived the States of power to condemn for the use of a telegraph company a part of the right of way of an interstate road or bridge over navigable waters. Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Western Union, 250 U. S. 363. Regulating use of sleeping cars.-A statute imposing a penalty upon sleeping car companies if, the lower berth being occupied, the upper berth is let down before it is actually engaged, deprives the carrier of property without due process of law. Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Wisconsin, 238 U. S. 491. Miscellaneous regulations.—Under its reserved powers a State may make any regulation for the operation of railroads within the State so long as it does not result in the taking of property without due process of law forbidden by this amendment, and does not conflict with Federal regulations. Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Minneapolis, 232 U. S. 430. Mississippi v. Mobile, etc., R. Co., 244 U. S. 388. Missouri Pac. R. Co. v. Kansas, 216 U. S. 262. Gladson v. Minnesota, 166 U. S. 427. Chesapeake, etc., R. Co. v. Commission, 242 U. S. 603. Cincinnati, etc., R. Co. v. Connersville, 218 U. S. 336. Street railways.-An order of a railroad commission requir ing a street railway to double track its line for a specified distance will be sustained when it does not present a clear case Amend. 14.-Rights of Citizens Sec. 1.-Due Process-Police Power of unreasonable, arbitrary, or confiscatory action on the part of the commission. Phoenix R. Co. v. Geary, 239 U. S. 277. Paducah v. Paducah Ry., 261 U. S. 267. See also Milwaukee El. R. Co. v. Wisconsin, 252 U. S. 100, as to contractual duty and financial status. Detroit United Ry. v. Detroit, 229 U. S. 39; Cleveland, etc., R. Co. v. Cleveland, 204 U. S. 116; Des Moines v. Des Moines, etc., R. Co., 214 U. S. 179; and Detroit United Ry. v. Detroit, 255 U. S. 171, as to effect of expiration of franchise. Puget Sound Traction, etc., Co. v. Reynolds, 244 U. S. 574; Southern Iowa Elec. Co. v. Chariton, 255 U. S. 539; and San Antonio v. San Antonio P. S. Co., 255 U. S. 547, as to rates and service. Statute providing for the operation of a railway by trustees held not unconstitutional under this section. Boston v. Jackson, 260 U. S. 309. Motor vehicles.-A New York statute requires persons engaged in the business of carrying passengers for hire in motor vehicles upon public streets to file security or insurance for payment of judgments for death or injury to person or property, held not so burdensome as to amount to confiscation. Packard v. Banton, 264 U. S. 140. Bridge companies.-Requiring company constructing international railroad bridge to add foot and carriage ways, as contemplated by charter, held not to violate this amendment in absence of showing that additions would not yield reasonable returns. International Brdg. Co. v. New York, 254 U. S. 126. Telegraph and telephone companies-Liability for negligence.— A statute prohibiting a stipulation against liability for negligence in the delivery of an interstate message is not invalid as a deprivation of liberty to contract. Western Union v. Commercial Milling Co., 218 U. S. 406. Rates.-There is a presumption that telephone rates fixed by a commission are reasonable, and the burden rests upon the company to show that they are confiscatory. Louisiana v. Cumberland Tel., etc., Co., 212 U. S. 414. Gas and electric companies.-In this, as in every other legislative rate case, there are presented three questions of prime importance: First, the present reasonable value of the company's plant engaged in the regulated business; second, what will be the probable effect of the reduced rate upon the future net income from the property engaged in serving the public; and, third, in ascertaining the probable net income under the reduced rates pre Amend. 14.-Rights of Citizens Sec. 1.-Due Process-Police Power scribed, what deduction, if any, should be made from the gross Lincoln Gas, etc., Co. v. Lincoln, 223 U. S. 357; 250 U. S. 256; 256 See also Willcox v. Consolidated Gas Co., 212 U. S. 19. Newark Natural Gas, etc., Co. v. Newark, 242 U. S. 405. Cedar Rapids Gas Light Co. v. Cedar Rapids, 223 U. S. 655. Union Dry Goods Co. v. Georgia, 248 U. S. 372. New Orleans Gas Light Co. v. Drainage Comm., 197 U. S. 453. Dobbins v. Los Angeles, 195 U. S. 223. Ohio Oil Co. v. Indiana, 177 U. S. 190. New York, etc., Gas Co. v. McCall, 245 U. S. 345. Los Angeles v. Gas Co., 251 U. S. 32. Walls v. Midland Carbon Co., 254 U. S. 300. Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. Oklahoma, 258 U. S. 234. Water companies.-Under the police power a municipality may regulate the rates and practices of water companies, but such regulation must not operate to deprive a company of its property without due process. Spring Valley Water Works v. Schottler, 110 U. S. 354. Van Dyke v. Geary, 244 U. S. 39. San Diego Land, etc., Co. v. National City, 174 U. S. 739. Knoxville v. Knoxville Water Co., 212 U. S. 1. Stanislaus County v. San Joaquin, etc., Co., 192 U. S. 213. Denver v. New York Trust Co., 229 U. S. 123. Denver v. Denver, etc., Co., 246 U. S. 178. Ohio Valley Water Co. v. Ben Avon Borough, 253 U. S. 287. Dunbar v. New York, 251 U. S. 516. Helena Water Works Co. v. Helena, 195 U. S. 388. Madera Waterworks v. Madera, 228 U. S. 454. Skaneateles Waterworks Co. v. Skaneateles, 184 U. S. 363. Newburyport Water Co. v. Newburyport, 193 U. S. 577. Consumers' Co. v. Hatch, 224 U. S. 148. Trenton v. New Jersey, 262 U. S. 182. Bluefield Co. v. Pub. Serv. Comm., 262 U. S. 679. Joslin Co. v. Providence, 262 U. S. 668. Pipe-line companies.-Order of corporation commission declaring pipe-line company a common carrier held not unconstitutional as denying due process. Pierce Oil Corp. v. Phoenix Ref. Co., 259 U. S. 25. Insurance companies—In general.—A statute which authorizes a public officer to bring an insurance company before a judicial tribunal which, after full opportunity for defense, may determine whether it is insolvent or its condition such as to render its continuance in business hazardous to the insured or to the public, etc., does not deprive the company of property without due process of law. Chicago Life Ins. Co. v. Needles, 113 U. S. 583. New York Life v. Head, 234 U. S. 149. Amend. 14.--Rights of Citizens Sec. 1.-Due Process-Police Power New York Life v. Dodge, 246 U. S. 357. License to do business.—A statute regulating the licensing of foreign insurance companies does not deny due process of law in giving to the insurance commissioner the discretion, after investigation, of issuing a license merely upon the giving of a surety bond or upon the deposit of bond or mortgage securities acceptable to him. Phoenix Ins. Co. v. McMaster, 237 U. S. 63. Regulating rates.-The business of insurance is one in which the public has such an interest that a statute authorizing the State insurance superintendent to regulate the rates does not unconstitutionally deprive a company of its liberty of contract. German Alliance Ins. Co. v. Lewis, 233 U. S. 389. Contract outside of State.-A State statute which, as construed by the State supreme court, prohibits the making of a marine insurance contract outside the State on property then in the State, is invalid as a deprivation of liberty without due process of law. Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U. S. 589. Regulating liability on insurance policies.—A statute providing that, under every contract or policy of insurance thereafter made or issued by any insurance company connected with any tariff association, the assured may, in addition to the actual loss or damage suffered, recover 25 per cent of the amount of such actual loss, any provision or stipulation in such contract or policy to the contrary notwithstanding, does not deprive a company of its property without due process of law. German Alliance Ins. Co. v. Hale, 219 U. S. 307. A statute which cuts off any defense by a life insurance company, based upon false or fraudulent statements in the application, unless the matter misrepresented actually contributed to the death of the insured, does not deprive such a company of its liberty without due process of law. Northwestern Ins. Co. v. Riggs, 203 U. S. 243. Judgment for excessive assessments.-Pecuniary judgment for insured against insurance company for assessments in excess of maxima fixed by contract does not involve unconstitutional exercise of visitorial power over corporation. Hartford Life Ins. Co. v. Douds, 261 U. S. 476. Suicide. A statute providing that "in all suits upon policies of insurance on life hereafter issued by any company doing business in this State, to a citizen of this State, it shall be no defense that the insured committed suicide," unless contemplated Amend. 14. Rights of Citizens Sec. 1.-Due Process-Police Power at the time of the application, is a legitimate exercise of State power. Whitfield v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 205 U. S. 489. Grain elevators. A general State statute regulating the business and charges of public warehousemen engaged in elevating and storing grain for profit does not deprive one of his property without due process of law. Brass v. North Dakota, 153 U. S. 405. Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 135. Budd v. New York, 143 U. S. 546. Cargill v. Minnesota, 180 U. S. 468. Merchants' Exch. v. Missouri, 248 U. S. 365. Banks and banking.-A statute creating a State banking board and directing it to levy upon every State bank an assessment for the purpose of creating a depositors' guaranty fund is not invalid as depriving a bank of property without due process of law. Noble State Bank v. Haskell, 219 U. S. 104. Shallenberger v. Holstein Bank, 219 U. S. 114. Farmers Bank v. Federal Reserve Bank, 262 U. S. 649. Security Savings Bank v. California, 263 U. S. 282. Mines and mining.-A statute requiring entries in certain coal mines to be not less than a prescribed width does not violate this clause but is a proper exercise of the police power. Barrett v. Indiana, 229 U. S. 26. See also St. Louis, etc., Coal Co. v. Illinois, 185 U. S. 207. Relation of employer and employee.'-Statutes regulating the hours of labor of employees, the payment of wages, the age of employees in dangerous occupations, etc., are not invalid if they do not result in the taking of private property without due process of law. Bunting v. Oregon, 243 U. S. 426. Riley v. Massachusetts, 232 U. S. 671. Miller v. Wilson, 236 U. S. 373. Bosley v. McLaughlin, 236 U. S. 385. Holden v. Hardy, 169 U. S. 380. Lochner v. New York, 198 U. S. 52. St. Louis, etc., R. Co. v. Paul, 173 U. S. 409. 1 See same subject, pp. 598, 657, and 735. |