The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1869-02-22
Terms $500 per annasms, In adrance.

| ~ WIG Assu VI 11a-Sn AooV,1oVern0r Morrill, va-
toed the bill on the ground that the actacOn,a,r.
ed an express limitation cftae pOper Of The Leofs.
!dtuye oUer the corporation thereby creqtsd. ;,
but took no exception to the bill as in any way
invading the rights OF the Somerset and Ken.
nebec Railroad Company, nor made any OBJ
lection to its passage, on the ground that thers
was any infraction of their rights as guarau-
teed by the Legislature. On the contrary. thu
14th section of the bill in question having been
road Company received the approval of the
Governor on the 18th of March 1860. Il Is
noticeable in this connection that Governor
morrill, approved the charter of the Aroostook
Railroad Company on the 10Th of March 1860,
three days after his veto Of the Somerset BAIL
ioao cnarter, although 1T contained in the ex.
ae' "oruS, tne Objectionable feature that call
90 iorth his veto, and he approved afterward.
while Governor, the charter of the BANGOR
and Piseataquis Railroad Company oontain;ng
the exact words objected to by him in hi. vstc
of the Somerset bill.
Governor Morrill, being Director of IN.
Somerset and Kennebec Railroad at the tiua
he approved of the charter of the Somers.t
Railroad, must have had full knowledge of tb.
fact that the Somerset and Kennebec Rail
road had at that time no right to extend a line
beyond Skowbegan, having made NO such OBJ
lection in his veto message. Whereas Tad the
charter of the Somerset and Kennebec Rail-
road been then in force, 1t would have been
his duty to exercise his veto power to arrest
so great an act of injustice, for the line of the
Somerset road as defined in its charter be.
tween Norridgewock and Carratunk Falls was
ooincident with that OF the Somerset and Ken.
nebec Road, and it would have been a clear
invasion Of the rights of the Somerset and
Kennebec road to have granted the charter
had they any chartered rights beyond Skow.
hegan.
The Somerset and Kennebec Railroad Com
pany never made any location OF their line be-
yond Skowhegan, which location by the Act
of April 9th, 1852, was to have been made on
or before the 31st day Of December, 1854 The
Legislature OF 1860 therefore, finding no loca.
ton beyond Skowhegan regarded their rights
as lapsed, and gave q charter to new parties.
The Somerset and Kennsbec Railroad Com
pany having laid by, and seen the grant CON.
frrled to the corporators OF the Somerset rail.
road, the Governor himself haviog consented
to tbe grant, being a member Of the corpora
tioa and one of its Directors. they must be re-
garded as waving all right undsr their charter
60 occupy the ground above Skowhegan.
Having laid by from 1854 to 1868 period Of
fourteen years, without any practical assertit n
of their right to build, they stand precisely on
the same ground as strangers, having no right
whatever under their charter to extend the
line beyond Skowhegan.
Regarding it in the light of new applica.
ton by outside parties the question is, will The
public interest demand the building of two
lines into Somerset county; every one will an
swer no. There Is scarcely business enough
for one line, and the question is, which now
has the best right.
The Somerset and Kennebec railroad In
under lease for fifteen years to the Portland
and Kennebec railroad, and the parties who
now control the Portland and Kennebec rail-
road own the stock of the Somerset and Ken
nebec railroad which stock cannot be sffs cted
till the termination of the lease having fifteen
years to run.
On the contrary the entsrprising people Of
Somerset county have raised large portion Of
the means to build their line through to Cara
tunk Falls, have put the road under contract,
are under obligations to build it, and will be
greatly injured if not absolutely ruined, If the
Somerset and Kennebsc railroad Is allowed at
this late hour to come in and destroy them,
The principles which must govern in this
case are SO clearly stated by Chancellor Kent,
that we quote the following paragraphs upon
the subject. Kent's Commentaries, page 500,
9th edition, ~ franchises:
Another class of incorporeal hereditamsnts
are franchises, being certain privileges con-
ferred by grants from governments, and vested
in Individuals. In England they are very nu-
merous, aud are understood to be royal prvi-
leges in the hand of a subject. They coutain
an implied covenant on the part of the govern
ment not TO invade the rights vested, and on
the part Of the grantees to execute the coudi-
tons and duties prescribed in the grant. Some
Of these franchises are presumed to be found
ed on valuable consideration, and to involve
public duties, and to be made for the public
accommodation, and to be affected with Jus
pubstcttns, and they are necessarily exclusive
in their nature. The government cannot re-
sumo them at pleasure, or do any act to inn
pair the grant, without breach OF contract.
The privilege of making road. or establish
ing ferry, and taking tolls for the use Of the
same, is franchise, and the public have inter-
est in the same; and the owners OF the tram
ehise are liable to answer in damages, II they
shotld refuse to transport an individual with.
out any reasonable excuse, upon being paid or
tendered the usual amount of fare. The OBJ
1gation between the government and the own
er of such franchises is mutual. He IS Oblig-
ed TO provide and maintain facilities for accom-
modating the public at all times, with prompt
and convenient passage
The law, on the other hand, in consideration
of this duty, provides him recompeDse, by
means of an exclusive toll, to be exacted from
persons who use the road or ferry, and of
course 1t will protect him against any new es-
tab .ishment which Is calculated to draw away
his custom to his prejudice. An estate in such
franchise, and an estate in land rest upon the
same principle, being equally grants Of right
or privilege tor an adequate consideration. IT
the creation of the franchise be not declared
to be exclusive, yet 1t is necessarily implied in
the grant, as in the case of the grant of ferry
BRIDGE or turnpike, or railroad, that the gov-
errn'ent pM not either directly or Indirectly
nterfefe tolh 1t, so as to destroy or materially
impair its value. Every such interferen nee,
whether it be by the cfeation Of rival han-
chise or otherwi e, would be in violation or in
fraud OF the grant. All grants o. franchises
ought to be SO construed as to give them due
effect, BY exc uding all contiguous competition,
which would be injurious, and operate fraudu-
lsntly upon the grant. Erl . ~.
What would be said in case the Penobscot
and Kennebec Railroad, now the N zine Gen.
trail Railroad, should undertake to build line
between the south line of Gardiner and the
north line Of Watervile under the authority
Of the act of April z, ls45 chapter 2s5?
The answer would be the same as that ap-
plicable to the Somerset ane Ksnnebec Rail-
road Company,-You waived your right to
build from Waterville to Gardiner, and the
rights of other parties have intsrvsnsd.
Varieties.