The national Republican. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1866-1870, 1869-10-07
THE COU RTS.

A. An nttOrntt Nnu cOuuncliOF OF tnlH court.
On motion Of J. Hubley. Ashton, esq, An.
thony Pollok, ESQ.,, Of wsahinston, d. u, was |
admitted TO practice As an attorney and soun-
No. is. Mayor, &C., OF the city Of Memphis,
appellants, .vs. thompson Dean. The srsu. |
ments Of this cause was commenced By Mr.. T. |
=. stanton, OF counsel for the appellants, con. |
tinued BY Mr.. MeRae and MT. Humes, Of ooun'
The csss 81 the Memphis Gas Light Com.
pAny ct al. vs.. Desn, above. mentioned, comes
cult court for the district Of west Tsnnssses.
tits, below, an application for an injunction BY
the plaintiff, as a citizen Of Tennessee apd
10 ~ the M M'%IS: a hsss VSn .
Light Company from Interfering with the
Sy laying pipe; IN TIE street. Of Me%phs and
The Memphis Gas Light Company was char
tered by the Legislature OF Tennessee In 1851,
but US nao an. have been recognized BY sub.
Its charter requires 1t to erect and keep the
necessary building, and apparatus TO supply
such citizens OF Memphis with Gas as shalt
able rules OF the company, At rates not greater
than those usual In cities Of the Southwest.
ps h ss s .s.S NH sas q Mem
msins on the streets OF that city, and 10 vested
with the exclusive right OF supplying for
T.e Y's Pie ssn 81 M II: a.
charges. Under these arrangements u has
huiit Its works and extended its malns through
The Memphis. aayo.o aasligh, Company 1.
an Incorporation OF more recent date. Its
charter grants to 1t the same franchises which
by a previous act the Legislature had con.
ferred upon the Nashville Gas Company which
the act authorized to lay Its pipes anywhere
10 the State north Of the Cumberland river.
1t proceeded to erect Its works, and by author.
city corporation invested t25o, 200 In its stock
rhe attempt Of the Memphis Gayoso Com.
pany to lay pipes in the Memphis streets was
cree wa. rendered BY q State tribusaI enJoin.
Ing the Gayoso Memphis Company from cross.
Ing their pipes above those Of the Memphis
Company, but allowing them to cross under
meath.
This decision, though acquisseed In by the
Memphis Company, was not satisfactory to
all Its stockh elders, one OF whom, Mr.. Thomp.
suit in the United States Circuit Uoas St to re.
| strain the Memphis Gayoso Company from
| using the streets OF Memphis for the purpose
| Court the case comes up on appeal. The ease
| involves franchise estimated at i0,00O, 900.
| Mr.. I. p: stanton appeared for the appel.
lantst Mr., Res, OF Memphis, and Dol. Humes
for the appellee.
| Mr.. stanton eontended, 10 opening, that the
i Memphis Gas Light Company had not the ex.
Of EsaprlySSs M citizen: p
OF the terms OF Its charter It was only obliged
to erect works sufficient to supply gas to the
| eignt Thousand people VINO uwelt In Memphis
| at the time the charter was granted. There
| was no obligation which constrained them TO
supply with gas the sixty thousand people
who now inhnbit the city.
The appellee strove TO show that beeau
he was bound to build works sufficient to sup.
| ply all the citizens 1t was to DO inferred tina,
he was bound to supply all the citizens, and
citizens, then he was bound to supply every
increase for ninety nine years, the term Of hii
charter, and because he was bound to supply
| OF the supply. This, he submitted, was piline
inference on Inference In a m tanner not legiti
mate. He contended that tho Memphis com
pany had not complied with Its charter. II,
commended that the case below aying been se
| for hearing on bill and answer, a reptile tiot
filed In the suit was not to be considered, bu
the answer so far as responsive to the bill
Mr.. d. X. MeRse, OF Memphis, for the ap
| pellant, argued thSt the current. OF English
and American decisions established the Prin
ereign Of company for q public Improved
was 10 the nature Of a contract with ever
citizen who had an interest In the duty to b,
performed BY the party to whom the franchis,
was granted. BY such q contract made will
the sovereignty of Tennessee, the duty OF sup
plying with gas all the Inhabitants or Mem
pitts who might wish the same, was impose,
| on the Memphis company. This duty beinJ
part and parcel Of the contract is reciprocal
on the part OF the grantee that he will expen,
the capital necessary to maintain q capacity
to supply ALI on the part of the grAutor tn a
he may supply all free from Injurious conn eli
ton BY any other vendor, or In other word
| the privilege is co-extensive with the duty
qui senih oaui seniire debsi 81 eommodum. II
support OF this view he quoted Charles Rive
Bridge ease, II Peter, 49, Nor.ick d..lighh
Conn, page 20. and others.
The city OF Memphis had given the Memphi
t1mpany the right ofwav over the streets b,
log out OF an ineorporeal hereditamenf, an,
trespass could be m iintslned for Its disturb
anee. This contract gave the exclusive US
oLthe streets; In would bc useless unless ex
In none Of the cases Ia which courts hsy,
maintained the exclusive rights Of gas com
Psnies was any exclusive right expressed
the Legislature. Testing this case by the pro
| visions the intent be seen; by the wort
lessness Of the franchise 4 a rival might b
chartered by the regulation OF the price 0
gas 10 the eharterj BY the contract made b.
the city, and indeed BY an Inspection OF boil
TIE charters granted TO the company. Tn
charter to the Memphis Gayoso COMPANY
void as contrary to the constitution OF fennei
see In taking private property without com
pensation. Under Its charter It cannot la
THE Nashville company, and that had powe
to lay pipes only north Of the Cumberlan u,
river Mr.. Mex. was listened to with msrket
Gen. Humes followed 10 an able but brie
argument In support OF the appellee,s ca Sc
and the court then adjourned until Thursda
Torning, at II o'clock, when Mr.. Stanton vii
| close the argument.
| CRIMINAL CouRT-Judge Fishcr.-This cour
was occupied as follows yesterday
TO THE PKsiTEsTIARY.
Thomas Smith and John Wilson, conyicte
OF horse stealing on their trial on the 18th Q
last month, were sentenced to imprison m en-
In the Albany penitentiary Tor two years.
John Wilson, for house stealing, IA secon
charged pleaded guilty, and was sentenced /
the penitentiary for two years.
Edward Edwards, convicted last month O