Case ID: us-ct-cl_62/html/0154-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Hat, Judge,\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE RAILROAD CO. v. THE UNITED STATES
    [No. E-339.
    Decided April 26, 1926]
    
      On the Proofs
    
    
      Railroad, rates; land-grant deductions. — (1) Members of tbe Enlisted Reserve Corps, United States Army, and Naval Reserve Force, on active duty, members of tbe Navy Nurse Corps, and Army, Navy, and Marine Corps guards and prisoners, enlisted men, are troops of tbe United States witbin tbe meaning of tbe land-grant statutes and their transportation for the Government is subject to land-grant deductions. See Illinois Central R. R. Co. oase, ante, p. 61.
    (2) Members of tbe Coast Guard, Treasury Department, in times of peace, and members of tbe National Guard when not in tbe Federal service are not troops of tbe United States witbin tbe meaning of'the land-grant acts. See Louisville & Nashville R. R. Co. case, 258 U. S. 374, and Oregon-Washington R. R. & Nav. Co. case, 60' C. Cls. 458.
    
      The Reporter's statement of the case:
    
      Mr. Benjamin Garter for the plaintiff.
    
      Mr. Louis R. Mehlinger, with whom was Mr. Assistant Attorney General Herman J. Galloway,' for the defendant.
    The court made special findings of fact, as follows:
    I. The plaintiff is a corporation and a common carrier by railroad of freight and passengers.
    II. Under acts of Congress granting lands in aid of railroads and other acts appropriating money the railroads so aided, including a portion of plaintiff’s lines, have been required to transport troops of the United States at fares less than those charged for other persons similarly transported.
    
      III. At the time of the service hereinafter mentioned the plaintiff and its connecting lines had entered into certain “ equalization ” agreements to accept in connection with transportation of troops of the United States the lowest net fares as computed via land-grant routes. Circular 15, Quartermaster General of the Army, May 18, 1922.
    IY. During the years 1920 to 1924, inclusive, the plaintiff and its connecting lines, at the request of authorized officers of defendant, made upon prescribed forms, pei’formed certain service for the United States in the transportation of the following classes of persons: (1) National Guard; (2) Members of Enlisted Eeserve Corps of the United States Army; (3) enlisted men of the United States Army; (4) Navy; and (5) Marine Corps, all traveling as military guards or prisoners; (6) Coast Guard; (7) Navy Nurse Corps; (8) Naval Eeserve Force.
    V. The members of the National Guard and of the Enlisted Eeserve Corps of the United States Army were traveling to and from camps of instruction, under orders of the Secretary of War, as authorized by the national defense act of June 3, 1916, 39 Stat. 166, and other acts of Congress. The members of the National Guard, so traveling, had not been called or drafted into the military service of the United States.
    The members of the Coast Guard were traveling under and at the expense of the Treasury Department.
    The members of the Navy Nurse Corps were traveling under competent orders of the Navy Department, and their transportation was paid from an appropriation for that department. The organization to which they belonged was established by the act of May 13,1908, 35'Stat. 127, 146.
    The members of the Naval Eeserve Force were traveling to and from camps of instruction under orders of the Secretary of the Navy, as authorized by the act of August 29, 1916, 39 Stat. 556, as amended.
    YI. For all of the foregoing transportation services the plaintiff rendered its bills to the proper disbursing or accounting officer of the United States, computed at full tariff fares, and deductions on account of land grant were made by the said disbursing or accounting officers from the identical bills or from other bills of the plaintiff for different services, and only such amounts were thereby allowed the plaintiff for said services as would have been due, under the land-grant acts and equalization agreements, for transporting-troops of the United States.
    In the case of the members of Enlisted Eeserve Corps of the Army there were included in the said transactions, in addition to land-grant deductions, certain additional deductions of 3 per cent, known as the “ military allowance.” The evidence does not disclose the separate amounts thereof, but does show the aggregate of the land-grant deductions and the 3 per cent military allowance to be $1,328.87.
    VII. For the various classes of persons mentioned, the said several deductions were as follows:
    (1) National Guard_$14, 703. 99
    (2) Members of Enlisted Reserve Corps, United States Army_ 1,328.87
    (3) Guards and prisoners, Army_ 430.97
    (4) Guards and prisoners, Navy_ 7.69
    (5) Guards and prisoners, Marine Corps_ 180.42
    (6) Coast Guard_ 124.89
    (7) Navy Nurse Corps_ 52.14
    (8) Naval Reserve Force_ 132.30
    16, 961.27
    The court decided that plaintiff was entitled to recover, in part.
   Hat, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is a suit brought by the Louisville & Nashville Eail-road Co. against the United States to recover certain land-grant deductions made by the defendant in a settlement with the plaintiff for transportation of certain persons. These deductions were made on the ground that the following classes of persons were troops of the United States within the meaning of the land-grant statutes, and that the plaintiff was obliged to transport these persons at the land-grant rates established and agreed upon by the parties :

(1) National Guard.

(2) Coast Guard.

(8) Members of Enlisted Reserve Corps, United States Army.

(4) Military guards and prisoners.

(5) Naval guards .and prisoners.

(6) Marine Corps guards and prisoners.

(7) Naval Nurse Corps.

(8) Naval Reserve Force.

In the case of Illinois Central Railroad Co. v. United States, No. D-348, decided by this court April 5, 1926, ante, p. 61, it was held that military guards and prisoners and members of the Naval Reserve Force were troops of the United States within the meaning of the land-grant statutes. It must also be held that naval guards and prisoners and Marine Corps guards and prisoners are troops of the United States within the meaning of those statutes.

The Naval Nurse Corps is a part of the regular Naval Establishment, and its members when being transported for the purposes of the Government' must be classified as troops of the United States. (35 Stat. 146.)

Members of the Enlisted Reserve Corps, United States Army, are constituent parts of the Army of the United States (41 Stat. 759). When in active service they possess all the attributes of any other members of the Military Establishment. In Illinois Central Railroad Co. v. United States, supra, we held that members of the Officers’ Reserve Corps were troops of the United States when on active duty. The same reasoning applicable to the Officers’ Reserve Corps applies to the Enlisted Reserve Corps when its members are on active duty, and when on active duty and the transportation required in connection therewith is paid for by the United States the travel is subject to land-grant deductions authorized for troops of the United States.

The National Guard when not in the service of the United States is no part of the Military Establishment of the Government, and are not troops of the United States within the meaning of the land-grant acts, and the plaintiff is therefore entitled to the transportation of these persons free from land-grant deductions.

The same is true of the Coast Guard, which is only a part of the Military Establishment of the Government in time of war.

The plaintiff is therefore entitled to have a judgment for $14,828.88, and it is so ordered.

Graham, Judge; DowNey, Judge; Booth, Judge; and Campbell, Qhief Justice, concur.