Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1871-07-13
THE RAILROAD SUITS.
ARGUMENT

Detntlfef kIlea Ny tuC OOuht1s az .
Party Defendant in the Case of
The Bill Of the State of Tennessee VS.. the Edge
field and Kentucky Railroad Co., and others.
This bill is filed under the provisions of the Act
of Dec % 1876. The first section provides in
substance, that bill shall be Immediately filed in
the Chancery Court at Nashville, in the name and
behalf of the State, to which all the delinduent
companies, the respective stockholders holders of
bonds, creditors, and all persons interested in the
said several roads, shall be made defendants, and
shall be brought before the Court in the mode pre-
scrbed by the rules of practice in Chancery estab-
ished in this State, except otherwise herein pro-
vided. And said Court is invested: by the Act,
with the exclusive Jurisdiction to hear, adudcate,
and determine all questions of law and matters of
controversy of whatever nature, whether of law or
of fact, that have arisen that may arise touching
the rights and interests of the State, aud also of
the stockholders, bondholders, &C., in the roads,
and to make ali such rules orders and DEGREES in
terlocutory and final, may be deemed necessary
in order to final and proper adjustment of the
rights of all parties, preliminary to sale of the
interests Of the State in the roads, Also to declare
the exact amount of Indebtedness of each of said
companies to the State, and likewise to define,
may be thought proper, what shall be the rights
duties and liabilities of purchaser of the States
interest in said roads, in either of them, and
what shall be the reserved rights of said companies,
stockholders, &c, respectively against said pur
chasers, after such SALE under the existing laws Of
the State.
The second section says that 'the Judge of said
Court is empowered and specially requested to ap
first Monday of March, 1871, for the purpose Of
pedtinJ speedy determination of the various mat
ters contemplated by the act; and it is made the
duty Of the Court, Immediately on the filing of
said bill, to issue process and make publication In
the manner before indicated Tequirihqtke fdetend
ants 10 appear Gt said special tern and the de-
PENDANTS shall be severally required at said term
Especially to put in such defense to said bill as they
may respectively deem proper, provided that it be
consistent with the code and in order to save ex-
pense, said PARTIES or any of them, may in person
y nkA
the State, make an agreed case, submitting all such
questions as they may think proper to the imme-
date decision of the Court; and IN the discretion Of
the Court formal pLendinJs may be dispensed NTH by
simple statement on the record of the points
matters relied upon by the parties and sought to be
decided by the Court ("
Section third provides that 'f an account on be-
half of either of the parties shall to the Court
proper and necessary, touching any matters of fact
i'll issue between the parties, immediate refer
ence shall be made to the Clerk and Master or if
thought preferable, to such special Commissioner
as the Court may appoint, who shall proceed at
once to take such account, and make report to
adjourned term of the Court within such period as
the Court shall limit, not exceeding twenty days
from the date of the decree ordering the account.
And at such adjourned term, final action shall be
had upon said report
Section fourth says that competent counsel shall
be retained on behalf of the State, by the Comm is
siOners, whose duty it shall be- immediately on the
passage OF the act, to file bill in said Chancery
Court so framed as to elicit from the Court deter
Vi law ana con-
troversy now existing, or that may hereafter arise
between the State and the defendants"
Section nth provides that 'upon final decree
made by the Chancellor settling the rights of the
parties, either party shall have the right of appeal
or writ Of error to the Supreme Court in the usual
mode, except that the time of prosecuting writ of
error is limited in view of the urgent public
sty for speedy determination, to thirty days from
the final Decree and in of an appeal writ of
error to the Supreme Court a Transcript of the
record, or such part thereof as may be thought
necessary, shall be filed in the office of the Supreme
| Court at Nashville, within said thirty days. "
Section sixth enacts that 'n case of appeal or writ
OF error to the Supreme Court, the Judges thereof
III view OF the pressing erigencies Of the State
specially empowered and respectfully requested so
soon the transcript of the record shall be filed in
the office OF said Court, if then in session. to take
up and finally dispose of the case in preference to
all other cases on the docket, and if not in session.
to appoint special term for the immediate hearing
| of the same.n
These extracts are sufficient to enable me 10 make
l my points to the Court, on the demurrer. In the
| case OF Nanzant Ys. Waddel, Yerger 2GO, the
question was, "has the Legislature power to direct
| the mode by which members of particular cor
pOrate body may be notified to appear before the
ordinary tribunals Of the country to be proceeded
against according to the public and general laws Ct
the land?" Iguote the language of Judge Catron,
page 269
No new process was given by the act except that
OF summons for garnishee at the time of serv-
ing the original writ or edptGs ad TcspoHdeldttia
| Judge Catron says, page 269), THAT partial
1 law, IenuluB u4rectly or indirectly, to deprive a
corporation or an individual Of rights to property
or 10 the equal benedts Of the general aud Dubiic
dl7s Of the land" mark the language) sis uncon-
stitutlOnal and void We do not doubt Our entire
appreciation Is accorded to the decisions cited in
1 the causes OF Dartmouth College vs. Woodward 4
4 Wheat. DIS, and Holden vs. James, IL Mass 30G
/ Our Constitution provides that no freeman shall
| DC deprived OF his life, liberty property, but
1 by the Judgment of his peers or tine law of the
l land The clause, law of the land, means gene
raj and pnbic law, equally binding upon every
q nTfTWf nTrreakT
l erty and property must stand or fall by the same
rule or law that governs every other member of the
body polite or land under similar circJIu stances;
and every partial or private law which directly pro-
poses to destroy affect individual rights or doc,
the same thing By d6Ordg remedies le1ding 10 SINH.
tdf cgIlSel uehceS, Is unconstitutional and void.
l We're this otherwise, Odious individuals or corpo-
rate bodies, would he governed by one rule and the
| other
And Judge Peck, in the same case says, page
25]), "a law which is partial III its operation, in
tefjed 10 Ggect particular iadiriduds alone or 10
dgPTjUc them Of the bsiefts Of general lltrS is I'M
warranted by the Constitution and is void"
I In Wally's Heirs vs. Kennedy, Yerger, sos,
Judge CatrOn says ''the right Of every individual
l must stand or fall by the same rule or LIlc that
| governs every other member of the body polite or
land, under similar circumstances; and every par
tia or private law, which directly proposes to de
strOy or AFFECT individual rights, does the same
thing by dJOfdg remedies Leading 20 similar CON
sequences, Is unconstitutional and void"
But perhaps the case in our reports most nearly
akin to the one at bar is that Of the State Bank
/ Cooper ct al Yerger, Jg9
By act Of 1929, Oh. %, Court was directed to be
held at Nashville, to consist Of a Judge of the Su-
l preme Court, Chancellor and Judge of the Cir
| cult Court, with power and authority, upon COM
plaiut being made by the Bank, to hear and deter
mlEe all cases against the officers of the bank and
| their sureties, and against persons who may have
| Overchecked and thereby become defaulters to the
/ bank. The Court empowered by the act to
call all the defendants before it, to hear evidence
sftI ne Inn IN h
I pies If q court Of equity. The Court was declare
| supreme within its sphere of action, ard that nc
/ appeal lay from its decisions. The bill filed
against Cooper and the suretes on his official bond
| alleging that the parties had executed their bond,
and that Cooper had not faithfully discharged his du
ties, but on the contrary had omitted and neglected
well and truly to dischargeshe duties of CLERK, and
that he had received moneys OF the bank and
l wrOngfuly applied them to his own use. Upon this
state of the case the defendants cOntended that the
| Court a special and partial one; that the law
violated the right of trial by jury; and that the Law
was partial in its operation, and therefore not the
1 law CT the land.
| This Special Court was composed of Judges
| Green, Peck and Kennedy. And Judge CatrOn
/ says lin Yerger, 500, that the opinions of these
L three Judges was the most lucid exposition of the
| Constitutional questions within his knowledge.
l Judge Green, among other things, says, {pagt
500, "a particular description of the debtors OF
\ the State are assumed to be in default, and tc
have incurred liabilities TO the bank. The defend
ants would have been entitled TO a trial by Jury and
to appeal to the Supreme Court. In this state OF
the case the Legislature passed the act under
sideration, giving this Court the jurisdiction OF
those particular only; directed the mode OF
trial to be according to the principles of court OF
equity, (Which Is without jury and deCreed that
| there should be no appeal, at the same time, the
| law, it regards all others, remaining unchanged
The law acts upon individual cases, and is the SAME
i'll principle If a law had been passed in favor OF
| some merchant, enabling him, by the method pre-
scriDed, to take Judgment against his debtors, with
4 out the right of appeal. The interest which the
| people have the bank, is a sufficient reason why
the Legislature should feel deep socitude to Sc
| cure its funds but is 10 reason why they should
oyerstep the limits OF legislative authority TO effect
| this end. The fact that the persons embrrced il
| this act form class of the debtors to the bank
| tends more to give it the character Of a genera
| law than il the act had operated on an individual
| debtor only, whose case might have Some PECULIAR.
| ty distinguishing it from that of all Others
| Judge Peck says, in the discussion OF the act
| p. 900 at IS specially provided that the princ
l pies governing the Courts of Chsncerv' shall M
| those Dy which said Court shall be governed The
| Court may compel the parties to appear and answer
interrogatories; and il fun and fair invcstiga
tioI, 1t should appear that any person or person.
| complained OF, were in default or indebted, the
| Court should forthwith pronounce such Judgment
decree as might seem right according to the fact
OF the case without regard to form substance OF
the conpalnt,) against the person persons SO il
default indebted and their sureties if any there
be. The right of trial by jury is not in expires:
| terms, taken away by the act. 1t might indeed b.
trial by jury taken away, when it is BOT cOntepla
| ted that an issue should be made and the means Of
! procuring jury is not provided am free to Owl
that an act which gives such extraordinary mowers