Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

least to a railroad corporation of its own cre I to prevent, by change of time schedules, care
ation, as were not directed against interstate riage in different cars, or by other means or
commerce, but which only incidentally or re- devices, the carriage of freight from being
motely affected such commerce, and were not continuous from the place of shipment to the
in themselves regulations of interstate com- place of destination.
merce, but were designed reasonably to sub- It was said by this court in California v.
serve the convenience of the public.

California Pacific R. R. Company, 127 U. 8. Imaginary cases are put for the purpose 39 [32: 157, 2 Inters. Com. Rep. 153], thatof showing what might be done by the state "It cannot at the present day be doubted that would seriously interfere with or dis. that Congress, under the power to regulate criminate against interstate commerce, if commerce among the several states, as well the statute in question be upheld as consist. as to provide for * postal accommodations and[310] ent with the Constitution of the United military exigencies, had authority to pass States. Without stopping to consider wheth. such laws. The power to construct, or to er the illustrations referred to are apposite to authorize individuals or corporations to conthe present inquiry, it is sufficient to say that struct, national highways and bridges from it is always easy to suggest extreme cases state to state, is essential to the complete for the application of any principle embodied control and regulation of interstate comin a judicial opinion. Our present judgment merce. Without authority in Congress to has reference only to the case before us, and establish and maintain such highways and when other cases arise in which local stat- bridges, it would be without authority to utes are alleged not to be legitimate exer- regulate one of the most important adjuncts tions of the police powers of the state, but of commerce. This power in former times to infringe upon national authority, it can was exerted to a very limited extent-the then be determined whether they are to be Cumberland or National road being the most controlled by the decision now rendered. It notable instance. Its exertion was but little would be impracticable, as well as unwise, called for, as commerce was then mostly conto attempt to lay down any rule that would ducted by water, and many of our statesmen govern every conceivable case that might be entertained doubts as to the existence of the suggested by ingenious minds.

power to establish ways of communication For the reason stated the judgment of the by land. But since, in consequence of the Supreme Court of Ohio is affirmed.

expansion of the country, the multiplication

of its products, and the invention of rail809) *Mr. Justice Shiras file] the following roads and locomotion by steam, land transdissenting opinion:

portation has so vastly increased, a sounder The Constitution of the United States, in consideration of the subject has prevailed, its eighth section, confers upon Congress the and led to the conclusion that Congress has power to regulate commerce with foreign na- plenary power over the whole subject. Of tions, and among the several states, and course, the authority of Congress over the with the Indian tribes, and to establish post- territories of the United States, and its pow. offices and post roads.

er to grant franchises exercisable therein, In pursuance of this power, Congress, on are, and ever have been, undoubted. But the June 15, 1866, enacted that "every railroad wider power was very freely exercised, and company in the United States, whose road is much to the general satisfaction, in the creoperated by steam, its successors and as-ation of the vast system of railroads connectsigns, is hereby authorized to carry upon anding the East with the Pacific, traversing over its road, boats, bridges, and ferries, all states as well as territories, and employing passengers, troops, government supplies, the agency of state as well as Federal corpomails, freight, and property on their way

rations." from any state to another state, and to re- In the case of Cincinnati, New Orleans, and ceive compensation therefor, and to connect Texas Pacific Railway Co. v. Interstate Comwith roads of other states so as to form con- merce Commission, 162 U. S. 184 (40: 935, tinuous lines for the transportation of the 5 Inters. Com. Rep. 391], the validity of the same to the place of destination.” Rev. act of February 4, 1887, was sustained, and Stat. § 5258.

its provisions were held applicable even to By the act of February 4, 1887, entitled a railroad company whose entire road was "An Act to Regulate Commerce” (24 Stat. within the limits of the state of its creation, at L. 379), Congress created the Interstate when, by agreeing to receive goods by virtue Commerce Commission, and enacted that the of foreign through bills of lading and to parprovisions of that act should "apply to any ticipate in through rates and charges, it becommon carrier or carriers engaged in the came part of a continuous line of transportransportation of passengers or property tation. wholly by railroad, or partly by railroad and By an act approved February 23, 1869, the partly by water when both are used, under a state of Louisiana forbade common carriers common control, management, or arrange- of passengers to make discrimination *cr.:10-1311) ment, for a continuous carriage or shipment count of race or color. A person of color from one state or territory of the United took passage upon a steamboat plying beStates, or the District of Columbia, to any tween New Orleans and Vicksburg, in the other state or territory of the United States state of Mississippi, and was carried from

;"and that it should be unlawful for New Orleans to her place of destination any common carrier subject to the provisions within Louisiana, and being refused accomof the act, to enter into any combination, modations, on account of her color, in the rontract, or agreement, expressed or implied,' cabin specially set apart for white persons,

County Commissioners of the County of Gun. I the evidence need not be shown in any parnison for the amount of certain coupons of ticular or technical form. bonds. The Circuit Court of Appeals gave Spangler v. Green, 21 Colo. 505. judgment for only a portion of the amount The instructions to the jury, duly exclaimed. Judgment of the Circuit Court cepted to, were reviewable by the circuit and of the Circuit Court of Appeals re- court of appeals, and are open to consideraversed, and cause remanded for further pro- tion in this court. ceedings.

Pennock v. Dialogue, 2 Pet. 1; WorthingSee same case below, 49 U. S. App. 399. ton v. Mason, 101 U. S. 149, 25 L, ed. 848; The facts are stated in the opinion. United States v. Rindskopf, 105 U. S. 418,

Messrs. Thomas C. Brown, C. S. 26 L. ed. 1131; Ward v. Cochran, 150 C. S. Thomas, W. H. Bryant, and H. H. Lee, for 597, 37 L. ed. 1195. petitioner:

The rulings of the court, which were duly The court errs in reversing the judgment objected and excepted to at the time, were on errors committed in the admission or reviewable by the circuit court of appeals. exclusion of testimony, when the record l’icksburg & M. R. Co. v. O'Brien, 119 U. shows that all the testimony was not con- S. 99, 30 L. ed. 299; Meria v. Oliver, 148 U. tained in the bill of exceptions, and the court S. 664, 37 L. ed. 602; Lincoln v. Claflin, 7 below directed a verdict for the defendant. Wall. 132, 19 L. ed. 106; Lees v. United

Where a court takes a case away from a States, 150 U. S. 476, 37 L. ed. 1150; Hickjury and directs a verdict, the same rules man v. Jones, 9 Wall. 197, 19 L. ed. 551; apply as though the court had tried the case Michigan Ins. Bank v. Eldred, 143 U. S. 293, alone without a jury.

36 L. ed. 162. Robbins v. Potter, 98 Mass. 532; Daly v. Plaintiff was a bona fide holder of the Wise, 132 N. Y. 306, 16 L. R. A. 236; Maier coupons in question. v. Davis, 57 Wis. 212.

San Antonio v. Mehaffy, 96 U. S. 312, 24 Every presumption will be indulged in to L. ed. 816; Lexington v. Butler, 14 Wall. sustain the judgment of a trial court; and 282, 20 L. ed. 809; Macon County v. Shores, although improper evidence may have been 97 U. S. 272, 24 L. ed. 889. admitted, it will be presumed that in arriv- A bona fide holder is a purchaser for ing at a conclusion only proper evidence was value without notice, or the successor of one considered, and that the judgment of the who was such a purchaser. court below is correct.

McClure v. Oxford Twp. 94 U. S. 429, 24 Hinckley v. Pittsburgh Bessemer Steel Co. L. ed. 129. 121 U. S. 264, 30 L. ed. 967; Mammoth Min- If any previous holder of the bonds in suit ing Co. v. Salt Lake Foundry & Mach. Co. was a bona fide holder for value, the plain151 U. S. 447, 38 L. ed. 229; Parker v. Van tiff can avail himself of such previous holdBuren, 20 Colo. 217; White v. White, 82 er's position without showing that he himCal. 427, 7 L. R. A. 799; Smith v. Long, 106 self has paid value. Ill. 485; Tower v. Fetz, 26 Neb. 706; Kirk- Montclair v. Ramsdell, 107 U. S. 147, 27 land v. Telling, 49 Wis. 634; Minton v. Pick- L. ed. 431. ens, 24 S. C. 592; State v. Seabright, 15 W. Though he may have notice of infirmities Va. 590.

in its origin, a purchaser of a municipal The court below erred in holding that it bond from a bona fide holder before matuwas error in the trial court to admit in evi- rity takes it as free from such infirmities as dence the financial statements of Gunnison it was in the hands of such holder, county for the six months ending respective- Cromwell v. Sac County, 96 U. S. 51, 24 L. ly on December 31, 1881, June 30, 1882, and ed. 681; Douglas County Comrs. v. Bolles, 94 December 30, 1882.

U. S. 104, 24 L. ed. 46; Marion County Dixon County v. Field, 111 U. S. 83, 28 L. Comrs. v. Clark, 94 U. S. 278, 24 L. ed. 59; ed. 360; Lake County v. Graham, 130 U. S. Nauvoo v. Ritter, 97 U. S. 389, 24 L. ed. 1050. 674, 32 L. ed. 1065; Hedges v. Dixon County, The plaintiff Standley was a bona fide 150 U. S. 182, 37 L. ed. 1044; Lake County holder of the $5,000 of bonds received by him Comrs. v. Standley, 24 Colo. 1.

in exchange for warrants which he surrenThe court erred in holding that the re- dered to Gunnison county. citals contained in the bonds estopped the Douglas County Comrs. v. Bolles, 94 U. S. county from proving against an innocent 104, 24 L. ed. 46; Montclair v. Ramsdell, purchaser that the bonds had been issued in 107 U. S. 147, 27 L. ed. 431. excess of the limit of indebtedness author. The recital in the bonds, "that the total ized by the Constitution of Colorado. amount of this issue does not exceed the

Lake County v. Graham, 130 U. S. 674, 32 limit prescribed by the Constitution of the L. ed. 1060; Graves v. Saline County, 161 U. state of Colorado," is conclusive as an esS. 359, 40 L. ed. 732; Sutliff v. Lake County toppel in favor of a bona fide holder of the Comrs. 147 U. S. 230, 37 L. ed. 145. bonds in question.

Messrs. John F. Dillon, Edmund F. Chaffee County v. Potter, 142 U.S.355,35 Richardson, Harry Hubbard, and John M. L. ed. 1040; Buchanan v. Litchfield, 102 U. Dillon, for respondent:

S. 278, 26 L. ed. 138; Independent School Moral justice and equity and fair dealing Dist. v. Stone, 106 U. S. 183, 27 L. ed. 90; equally entitle the plaintiff to a recovery. Sherman County v. Simons, 109 U. S. 735,

Jasper County v. Ballou, 103 U. S. 745, 26 27 L. ed. 1093; Dallas County v. McKenzie, L. ed. 422; Graves v. Saline County, 16] U. 110 U. S. 686, 28 L. ed. 285; Dixon County S. 359, 40 L. ed. 732.

v. Field, 111 U. S. 83, 28 L. ed. 360. That the bill of exceptions contains all of The recital in the bond in question,

that it is issued "for valid floating indebtedness Lexington v. Butler, 14 Wall. 282, 20 L. of the said county,” creates an estoppel ed. 809; Macon County v. Shores, 97 U. S. which is conclusive in favor of the bona fide 272, 24 L. ed. 889; Cromwell v. Sac County, holder of such bonds. as

96 U. S. 51, 24 L. ed. 681; Montclair v. Jusper County v. Ballou, 103 U. S. 745, 26 Ramsdell, 107 U. S. 147, 27 L. ed. 431. L. ed. 422; Graves v. Saline County, 161 U. S. 359, 40 L. ed. 732; Huron v. Second Ward *Mr. Justice Harlan delivered the opin-[256] Sav. Bank, 57 U. S. App. 593, 86 Fed. Rep. ion of the court: 272, 30 C.C.A.38; West Plains Twp. v. Sage, This action was brought by E. H. Rollins 32 Ú. S. App. 725, 69 Fed. Rep. 943, 16 C. C. & Sons, a corporation of New Hampshire, to A. 553; Kiowa County Comrs. v. Howard, obtain a judgment against the board of com49 U. S. App. 642, 83 Fed. Rep. 296, 27 C. C. missioners of Gunnison county, Colorado, A. 531; Cadillac v. Woonsocket Inst. for Sav. a municipal corporation of that state, for 16 U. S. App. 546, 58 Fed. Rep. 935, 7 C. C. the amount of certain coupons of bonds is. A. 574; National L. Ins. Co. v. Huron Bd. of sued by the defendant in 1882. At the close Edu. 27 U. S. App. 244, 62 Fed. Rep. 778, 10 of the evidence the defendant requested a C. C. A. 637.

peremptory instruction in its behalf. The The issue of bonds to pay off or refund an circuit court charged the jury at some existing indebtedness does not increase the length, but concluded with a direction to find debt or create a new debt. It merely changes a verdict for the defendant, which was done, the form of the old debt.

and a judgment in its favor was entered. Powell v. Madison, 107 Ind. 106; Blanton That judgment was reversed in the circuit v. McDowell County Comrs. 101 N. C. 532; court of appeals, and the case is here upon Los Angeles v. Tweed, 112 Cal. 319; Sioux writ of certiorari. 49 U. S. App. 399. City v. Weare, 59 Iowa, 95; Opinion of the The case made by the complaint is as fol. Justices in 81 Me. 602, Appx.

lows: The so-called "financial statements” can- By the laws of Colorado, boards of county not be introduced in evidence as against a commissioners were authorized to examine, bona fide holder of the bonds in question allow, and settle all accounts against their containing such recitals as these bonds con respective counties, and to issue county war. tain.

rants therefor; to build and keep in repair Sutliff v. Lake County Comrs. 147 U. S. the county buildings, to insure the same, 230, 37 L. ed. 145; Chaffee County v. Potter, and to provide suitable rooms for county 142 U. S. 355, 35 L. ed. 1040; Evansville v. purposes, and to represent the county, and Dennett, i6l U. S. 434, 40 L. ed. 760. have the care of county property and the

No record is constructive notice as to any management of the business and concerns of negotiable paper unless a statute expressly the county in all cases where the law did not so provides.

otherwise provide. Burck v. Taylor, 152 U. S. 634, 38 L. ed. On the 1st day of December, 1882, the de 578.

fendant board caused to be made and executThe purchaser of negotiable paper does ed certain bonds acknowledging the county not have constructive notice of any litiga- of Gunnison to be indebted and promising tion pending, or any judgments which may to pay to

or bearer the sum therehave been previously rendered, regarding in named, for value received, redeemable at

the pleasure of the county after ten years, Warren County v. Marcy, 97 U. S. 96, 24 and absolutely due and payable twenty L. ed. 977; Carroll County v. Smith, 111 U. years after date, at the office of the county S. 556, 28 L. ed. 517; Orleans v. Platt, 99 treasurer, with interest at eight per cent U. S. 676, 25 L. ed. 404; Cass County v. Gil. * per annum, payable semi-annually on the[257] lett, 100 U. S. 585, 25 L. ed. 585; Thompson first days of March and September in each v. Perrine, 103 U. S. 806, 26 L. ed. 612. year at the county treasurer's office, or at

Where it is sought to affect a bona fide the Chase National Bank in the city of New purchaser for value of commercial paper York, at the option of the holder, upon the with constructive notice, the question is not presentation and surrender of the annexed whether he had the means of obtaining, or coupons as they severally became due. might have obtained by prudent caution, Each bond contained this recital: “This the knowledge in question, but whether not bond is issued by the board of county com. obtaining was an act of gross or culpable missioners of said Gunnison county in ex. negligence.

change, at par, for valid floatiug indebtedWilson v. Wall, 6 Wall. 83, 18 L. ed. 727 ; ness of the said county outstanding prior to Ware v. Egmont, 4 DeG. M. & G. 460; Goetz September 2d, 1882, under and by virtue of v. Bank of Kansas City, 119 U. S. 551, 30 L. and in full conformity with the provisions ed. 515.

of an act of the general assembly of the state A person may estop himself from relying of Colorado, entitled 'An Act to Enable the upon the constructive notice which records Several Counties of the State to Hund Their furnish.

Floating Indebtedness,' approved February Brookhaven v. Smith, 118 N. Y. 634, 7 L. 21st, 1881; and it is hereby certified that R. A. 755; Wilde v. Gibson, 1 H. L. Cas. 605; all the requirements of law have been fully Stone v. Covell, 29 Mich. 359.

complied with by the proper officers in the If the plaintiff proves the payment of issuing of this bond. It is further certified value, then the burden is on the defendant that the total amount of this issue does not to show that the plaintiff had notice of the exceed the limit prescribed by the Constituillegality or fraud.

tion of the state of Colorado, aud that this

such paper.

issue of bonds has been authorized by a vote September, 1886, and made like default of a majority of the duly qualified electors thereafter up to and including Septenber of the said county of Gunnison, voting on 1st, 1892. the question at a general election duly held The plaintiff was the holder and owner of in said county on the seventh day of No- coupons formerly attached to and belonging vember, A. D. 1882. The bonds of this issue to certain bonds of the above issue. It asked are comprised in three series, designated judgment for the aggregate aniount of the 'A,' 'B' and 'C' respectively, the bonds of se. principal *of the coupons, with interest on the[ 259) ries ‘A’ being for the sum of one thousand amount of each coupon as it became due. dollars each, those of series 'B' for the sum The answer of the county contained a genof five hundred dollars each, and those oferal denial of all the allegations of the comseries 'C' for the sum of one hundred dollars plaint, and in addition set out elever affirmaeach. This bond is one of series 'A. The iive defenses, which were chiefly based upon faith and credit of the county of Gunnison the alleged fact that the county in issuing are hereby pledged for the punctual payment the bonds set forth in the complaint had atof the principal and interest of this bond.” tempted to incur an indebtedness not author

To each bond were attached coupons for ized by the Constitution of Colorado, or by the semi-annual interest, signed by the the statute referred to in the bonds. county treasurer.

The provision of the Constitution of ColoOn the first day of December, 1882, for rado prescribing the extent to which counties the bonds of the county with coupons at may become indebted, and to which the bonds tached as above specified, the defendant referred, is as follows: board made an exchange with the parties “No county shall contract any debt by loan then holding county warrants, which before in any form, except for the purpose of crect. that time, in accordance with the statutes ing necessary public buildings, making or in such case made and provided, had been repairing public roads and bridges; and

issued to them in settlement of claims pre- such indebtedness contracted in any one year [268]sented by them against the county. *In every shall not exceed the rates upon taxable prop

case when warrants were presented they erty in such county, following, to wit: Coun. were exchanged for the bonds of the county ties in which the assessed valuation of taxaat par for their face and interest. In each ble property shall exceed five millions of dolcase the blanks were filled out with the name lars, one dollar and fifty cents on each thousof the party receiving the bonds or exchanging and dollars thereof. Counties in which such the warrants, and the blank for the place of valuation shall be less than five nillions of payment filled in as the banking house of dollars, three dollars on each thousand dolthe Chase National Bank in the city of New lars thereof. And the aggregate amount of York. Thereupon the bonds were signed by indebtedness of any county for all purposes, the chairman of the board of county commis- exclusive of debts contracted before the adopsioners, countersigned by the county treas- tion of the Constitution, shall not at any time urer, and attested by the county clerk with exceed twice the amount above herein limthe seal of the county, and the coupons at-ired, unless when, in manner provided by tached were also filled out, stating the place law, the question of incurring debt shall, at of payment to be in the city of New York, at a general election, be submitted to such of the banking house of the Chase National the qualified electors of such county as in Bank, and stating also the number of the the year last preceding such election shall funding bond and the series to which it was have paid a tax upon property assessed to attached.

them in such county, and a majority of The issue of bonds as above set forth was those voting thereon shall vote in favor of authorized by a vote of the qualified electors incurring the debt; but the bonds, if any to be exchanged for warrants, and the be issued therefor, shall not run less than amount thereof was spread upon the records ten years, and the aggregate amount of debt of the county as provided for hy the act of so contracted shall not at any time exceed February 21st, 1881, entitled "An Act to En- twice the rate upon the valuation last herein able the Several Counties of the State to mentioned; provided that this section shall Fund Their Floating Indebtedness.” In all not apply to counties having a valuation of other respects the terms and conditions of less than one million of dollars." Laws of the act were fully complied with. The bonds Col. 1877, p. 62. were duly registered in the office of the au- *The act of February 21st, 1881, referred[ 260) ditor of the state.

to in the bonds in question, contains among In every case where bonds were issued and other provisions the following: delivered to the payee or to any person for "$1. It shall be the duty of the county him, the parties received them in exchange commissioners of any county having a float. for warrants, the amount of the bonds being indebtedness exceeding ten thousan i dol. ing the same as the amount of the warrants lars, upon the petition of fifty of the electors and interest thereon that haul theretofore of said counties (county) who shall have paid been issued by the county.

taxes upon property assessed to them in said From the 1st day of December, 1882, and county in the preceding year, to publish for up until the 1st day of March, 1886, the the period of thirty days in a newspaper pubcounty paid the interest on the bonds semi: lished within said county, a notice request annually in accordance with their terms and ing the holders of the warrants of such coun. of the coupons attached to them.

ty tu submit in writing to the board of counThe defendant board made default in the ty commissioners, within thirty days from payment of interest due on the first day of the date of the first publication of such no

[ocr errors]

we

we

case.

was

a

states cannot be overestimated. That this tion of county seats to receive and let off
species of regulation is one which must be, passengers with safety.”
if established at all, of a general and nation- In April, 1891, a petition was filed in the
al character, and cannot be safely and wise circuit court for Alexander county, in the
ly remitted to local rules and local regula- state of Illinois, by the county attorney in
tions, we think is clear from what has al. behalf of the state, alleging that the Illinois
ready been said. And if it be a regulation Central Railroad Company ran its south-
of commerce,

think have bound fast mail train through the city of demonstrated it is and as tha Illinois Cairo, two miles north of its station in that court concedes it to be, it must be of city, and over a bridge across the Ohio river, that national character, and the regulation connecting its road with other roads south of can only appropriately exist by general rules that river, without stopping *at its station in{321) and principles which demand that it showid Cairo, and praying for a writ of mandamus be done by the Congress of the United States to compel it to cause all its passenger trains under the commerce clause of the Constitu- coming into Cairo to be brought down to tion." Wabash, St. Louis, & Pac. Railway that station, and there stopped a sufficient Co. v. Illinois, 118 U. S. 557 [30: 244, 1 In- length of time to receive and let off passenters. Com. Rep. 31].

gers with safety. This case, so recent and so elaborately con- The railroad company contended that the sidered, has not eceived adequate attention statute did not require its fast mail train to in the opinion of the court in the present be run to and stopped at its station in Cairo,

and that the statute was contrary to the ConThe legislature of Illinois by the statute of stitution of the United States, as interfering February 10, 1851, incorporated the Illinois with interstate commerce and with the Central Railroad Company, and empowered carrying of the United States mail. The it to construct and maintain a railroad with court granted the writ of mandamus, and one or more tracks, from the southern ter- the railroad company appealed to the supreme minus of the Illinois & Michigan Canal to a court of the state, which affirmed the judg. point at the city of Cairo, with the same to ment, and held that the statute of Illinois

the city of Chicago on Lake Michigan, and concerning the stoppage of trains obliged the 320]also a branch *via the city of Galena to a defendant to cause its fast mail train to be

point on the Mississippi river opposite the taken into its station at Cairo, and be town of Dubuque, in the state of Iowa. The stopped there long enough to receive and let Chicago, St. Louis, & New Orleans Railroad off passengers with safety, and that the stat. Company

consolidated company ute, so construed, was not an unconstitution. formed under the legislatures of the states al interference with interstate commerce. or of Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, and with the carrying of the United States mails. Kentucky, whose line extended from New Or. The case was brought to this court, where leans to the Ohio river, built a railroad the judgment of the supreme court of Illi. bridge across the Ohio river to low-water nois was reversed in a unanimous opinion mark on the Illinois side, to which the ju- delivered by Mr. Justice Gray. Nlinois Cenrisdiction of the state of Kentucky extended. tral R. R. Co. v. Illinois, 103 U. 8. 142 [41: The north end of this bridge was at a part of 107). After reciting several statutes of 117Cairo about two miles north of the station of inois and of Congress, particularly the act the Illinois Central Railroad Company in of June 15, 1866, wherein Congress, for the that city; and the peculiar conforma- declared purpose of facilitating commerca tion of the land and water made it imprac- among the several states and the postal and ticable to put the bridge nearer the junction military communications of the United of the Ohio and Mississippi rivers. "By this States, authorized every railroad company in bridge the road of the Illinois Central Rail- the United States, whose road was operated road Company was thereby connected with by steam, to carry over its road, bridges, and that of the Chicago, St. Louis, & New Or- ferries, as well passengers and freight as leans Railroad Company. Thereafter the government mails, troops, and supplies, Illinois Central Railroad Company put on a

from one state to another, and to connect, in daily fast mail train, to run from Chicago to any state authorizing it to do so, with roads New Orleans, carrying passengers as well as

of other states, so as to form a continuous the United States mail, not going to or stop to say:

line of transportation, the court proceeded ping at its station in Cairo; but local trains

“The effect of the statute of Illinois, as adequate to afford accommodations for pas construed and applied by the supreme court sengers to or from Cairo were run daily on

of the state, is to require a fast mail train that part of the railroad between the Bridge Junction and Cairo. By a subsequent act of United States mails from Chicago, in the

carrying interstate

passengers and the 1889 it was enacted by the legislature of Ill. state of Illinois, to places south of the Ohio inois that "every railroad corporation shall river, over an interstate highway established cause its passenger trains to stop, upon its *by authority of Congress, to delay the trans-(322) arrival at each station advertised by such portation of such passengers and mail, by corporation as a place for receiving and dis- turning aside from the direct interstate route, charging passengers upon and from such and running to a station three miles and a trains, a sufficient length of time to receive half away from the point on that route, and and let off such passengers with safety: Pro. back again to the same point, and thus travvided, All regular passenger trains shall stop eling seven miles which form no part of its a sufficient length of time at the railroad sta-'course, before proceeding on its way; and

« ForrigeFortsett »