The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, George A. Sturtevant, Deputy Attorney-General, and Frank H. Short, for Appellants.

The end attained and not the form of the transaction must be considered by the court in determining its substance, and legal effect under the constitution. (Cashman v. Root, 89 Cal. 373;1 Sheehy v. Shinn, 103 Cal. 328.) The debates on the constitution showing the object of the provision making competing rates effective and unchangeable without the consent of the railroad commissioners should be considered. (People v. Stephens, 62 Cal. 236.) It is the duty of the court to prevent the evasion of the constitution. (Sheehy v. Shinn, 103 Cal. 325; Kullman v. Simmens, 104 Cal. 595.) Section 20 of article XII of the constitution does not violate the federal constitution. (Reagan v. Trust Co., 154 U. S. 394; Spring Valley Water Works v. Schottler, 110 U. S. 347.)

J. E. Foulds, John Garber, and P. F. Dunne, for Respondents.

The intent of the constitution is to be found only in the very words of the text. (6 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law, 2d ed., p. 922; Cooley on Constitutional Law, 2d ed., pp. 54-56; Greencastle v. Black, 5 Ind. 570; Chesapeake etc. Co. y. Manning, 186 U. S. 248; Endlich on Interpretation, sec. 144.) An. unlimited ticket confers a substantial right, protected by penal provision. (Civ. Code, sec. 490; Robinson v. Southern Pacific Co., 105 Cal. 526.) A limited ticket is a waiver of substantial rights. (Elliott on Railroads, sees. 1595-1599.) Section 20 (art. XII) of the state constitution violates the fourteenth amendment of the federal constitution as being an arbitrary classification of railroad corporations, and denying them the equal protection of the laws. (Johnson v. Goodyear Mining Co., 127 Cal. 4;1 Gulf etc. Ry. Co. v. Ellis, 165 U. S. 150; Union Sewer Pipe Co. v. Connelly, 99 Fed. 354.)