Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1872-02-25
LAW REPORT.
The Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court.
One Of the most important cases which
has bSen before the supreme court, at the
| present term. wss decided on Thursday,
Justice Sneed delivering the opinion OF
1 the court. Ths case was that of Whibden
| White vs.. the Nashville and Northwest
ern nd the Nashville and Chattanooga
Railroad companies, and involved the
/ question whether q court of equity has
the power to epjoin an incorporated rail-
road company from the use and enjoy
ment of q portion of its roRd-bed located
| on the land of person without his con-
| sent and whose title there has never
been extinguiEhsd by the payment of its
assessed vslue-the 'just Compensation"
guaranteed him by the constitution.
Whites land was appropriated, without
his consent, by the Nashville and North
western railroad company in 1860, and In
the following year the damage sustained
by White was assessed at $1,000, in aocor-
dance with the provisions of the internal
Improvement act, from which valuation
the comp ny appealed to the circuit court.
The war prevented the case from being
brought to trial and judgment until 1857.
Upon taking Its appeal, the company gave
no bond, as required by the charter. An
execution was issued upon the judgment
aud was returned on the 2lst Of October,
ls67-Hno property found.H An ipiunc-
ton was subsequently obtained from the
chRncery court TO restrain the Nashville
and Chattanooga railroad company from
operating the road until the judgment
should be paid, from which an Rppeal was
taken to the supreme court,
The court held:
First-Thst the owner of land cannot
bs deprived of his estate therein by the
exercise of the States right OF eminent
domsin, without the payment OF the 'Just
compensation" therefor, secured to HIM
by the constitution.
Second-That upon the failure to obtain
such lust compensation under and by the
legal remedy provided by the statutes, by
reason of the insolvency of the railroad
company, by which the land was provi-
aionaIIy taken, he has the right to have
such company sad the lessee of such COM
many enioined from tbe use, occupation
and operation of 80 much of tbs railroad
as is located on his lands, until he is paid,
In the present case, the ccurt DEGREES
that the Nashville and Northwestern
Railroad company shall pay into the office
of the court for the use of White the Vslue
of his land as found by the verdict of the
fury, with interest thereon ffom the time
Of the Judgment Of the circuit court, in
1857, within ninety days from this day of
ths hnal adjournment of the supreme
court. and that. unless the Nashville and
Northwestern Rsilroad company shall do
so, the defendants, and all other persons,
parties and corporations shall be enioined
and forbidden from the use, occupation
and operation of so much OF said railroad
as is located over Whites land, until he is
paid.
The following are extracts from Justice
Snsed's opinion, which are spoken Of by
the bar IS Of peculiar significance and
forces
awe have been sdmonished ct the bar
that the effect of the confirmation OF the
Chsncellor's decree in this cause will be
/ to stop the United States mail to check the
Impulse Of industrial progress, to cut in
twain an important line Of trade and tray
81, and to bring upon the public, and es-
psoially upon this common wealth, trouble,
! Inconvenience and misfortune. These are
considerations which, in case like this,
should not be pressed upon tribunal of
Justice, There is neither magic nor terror
In public policy when it obstructs the path
of constitutional right
HWe hold in this case that the State has
never acquired such q lien upon complain
antis land as to divest or defeat his right
! 10 the iust compensation secured to him
| bv the organic law. The right Of eminent
domain, lawfully exercised, Is entirely
compatible with fair and honorable deal
/ ing In the sovereign. 1t gives no ssnc-
/ tiou 10 an cot Of robbery, under the forms
Of law"
I court by Frank e. Williams for the \ ash
/ vile and Chattanooga road, the lessee
| Attorney-General Heisken submitted 9
brief for the State, and David Campbell
/ and q e. McAdoo appeared for White.
With regard to the sale OF the asnViiIe
and Northwestern road to the AasnVl1Ie
1 nd
/ held that the transfer did not, In any way
affect the merits of the case.
second Chaneery COurt-scota, Cham
eel1or.
3os. Brown VS. Hunt; 604, ToWnseno Va
Hawiey; 79e. Cook vs. same; wv Sasn v
asme; s6l, Weaver vs. same5 sos, klrtlanc
vE satne: 500, Dooley vs. Jeyce; elOi brsoy
va warren: sl2, Hume VS. Vahlman; slo
state va Big Creek 7. Co; Si4, Bentley "
| Rartlett: 6f7, Collier vs. Anderson; ~
| T,an0ford vs Aldrich; 95, Jackson vs. Rose
brouQh: lq4, City vs. Grieshsberi z0s Tooe
/ vs Bartlett; Sos, Lowenstinesvs WON'T osl
Topp VS. Wiggan SSS, Quinn VS. Lanlgan
Ttrst oircuit Court-HeiEkeIl. Judge
| Mondav's calendar contains the follow
inc oases: 577 Briggs 4 Peterson w White
more q Tyler; 5825f McOardy vs. Briggs
| n Peterson: sos Tennessee State bank usl
| vu BinRharn: 6O4 Tennessee State banl
use vs Bingham; 1855 Williams vs J. d
| House. 1914 Morrow Chandler q 90. VI
Hsrtly & Curly; 1852 Jackson vs. Raw
linQs; 1884 Stewart vs. Diggs; 1888 Walt VI
FrsnklIn; 1893 somerville vs O'Donnell
I7Oi Moody vs Thomas; l702 Hslsteed VI
Gallagher & Elliott; 170s Sutton va Wettel
& 90; I7O4 Fitzgerald q Neal Va Elias
1903 Pelkin, Wssrd q Co. vs Blsck Bros
I70s steinkuhl VS. Holst; l7Ce Fsnwick VI
Spears; I7I2 Smelling VS. Fields; Ills War
ton VS. Pyne; 17l4 Lehner vs Hanlan; 15ll
Reenmsn, use, VS. Corcorsn; l72l Mem
phis Gayoso Gas company vs Read; t7z
williams We Hardin; 1928 state Of Tennes
see vs. Donovan ct ais; IT'S Morton q 90
vs. Clesves.
second Circuit Csurt-HeIssy Judge
Monday will be motion day. Tuesday,
calendar. In addition 10 the cases alresdl
published, will contsin the following
25sS Pool We Horan; 1850 Green vs. Sears
2sss Mcclellan Va steamer zeboma ana
owners; 25ee Meyers " Burne; 2S0
Moody vs City Of Memphisl at9e Kelly y