
    In re the Constitutionality of Senate Bill No. 69.
    Prescribing Railroad Rates for Carriage of Freight and Passengers.— Under the act incorporating the C. C. R. R. Co., the legislature may prescribe rates for the c image of freight and passengers by said company, without violating constitutional provisions.
    The following statement sufficiently explains the question propounded: The Colorado Central Railroad Company was incorporated in 1865 under a special charter and at once proceeded to the construction and operation of its railroad. One section of the special charter provided that “ The legislative assembly * * * may after the expiration of twenty-five years from the passage of this act, and at the expiration of each period of twenty years thereafter, prescribe rates to be charged and collected by said corporation for transporting passengers and freight over said road and the branches thereof.” ' The twenty-five years mentioned having expired, the bill submitted to the court for its opinion was introduced for the purpose of prescribing rates for the carriage of freight and passengers in accordance with the power expressly reserved by the provision mentioned.
   Per Curiam.

The court is asked, generally, if the bill referred to in the interrogatory propounded be constitutional. The question is indefinite in not specifying some particular provision or provisions of the constitution under which the honorable senators doubt the validity of the contemplated legislation. But upon oral argument by counsel, amici curiae, the following sections of that instrument were alone relied on, viz.: 2 and 3 of article 15, and 25 of article 5. Our answer is accordingly limited.

The special legislative charter of the Colorado Central Railroad Company remained in force after the adoption of the constitution. And we are advised that the company has never signified its acceptance of the provisions of the constitution in the manner specified by section Y, article 15 of that instrument. The proposed legislation is undoubtedly special; but under the circumstances here presented we do not think its validity will be affected by the constitutional inhibitions mentioned, two of which deal with this subject.

The question propounded is therefore answered in the affirmative.  