, 1874-06-18
RAILROAD NEWS.
The Alton Railroad Case In tho
United States Court.
Arguments on The Motion to Quash Tho
Writ Of Certi0rarl.
The Case Taken Under Advisement
by the Court.
Miscellaneous Railroad Matters.
THE ILLINOIS LAW.


THE ILLINOIS LAW.
ARGUMENTS ON THE CHICAGO ALTON oABH.
!Specsat Utspaich to The Chicago Tribune
srniNar1ELp, ILL.,, Juno 17.-The history Of
tho Ault agalnst tho Chicago d Alton Railroad
Company 1as bcen written ~ 1t proceeded, and
1t is unnooosAary to reB!ate any Of tho events,
for thoy are Of such recent date Oh to be fatnll+
lar to all. On tho 18th day of May, 1874, and
whilc tho caao was on the docket Of
tho sangamon County Circuit Court, SUBJ
jecs to ho called up for some disc
position, petition was illod In the Circuit Court
Of tho United Btatos for Southern Illinois,
by tho attorneys Of tho Chicago l. Alton Rail-
rcd Company prayln for wrt Of qer1ora1i
requiring that Court to certify into tho Cirouia
Court Of tho Unitod STATUS nj! tho papers per-
tanning to tho suit against tho Chicago g. Alton
oiork Of tic Gouft without tue ordoror % direoion
Of any Of tho Judges Of tho Court.
Tho further procnodings III THO causo in tho
| sangamon Court having been Eivon, II u only
necossary to Bay TINT tho argument to-day before
| the Un1tol States Court was tho second stop to
| DO taken In that Court.
| THE IMPORTANCE OF TIE QUESTIONS INVOLVED
socmn to hnso boon felt by tbs,, Federal
this morning, tloro was full Bonoh, thing
never Soon or known in THIS District botoro.
Judges Davis, Drummond, and Treat presided.
1t was known that tho dooslon in this case
would not only indirectly docido the powor Of
tho stato Of Illinoia to regulate aud con-
troll its railroad corporations. but 1t would
forcshadow tho probable decision in tho railroad
cases iu Wisconsin. Tho result was, therefore,
looked for with great intoreat all over tho
| country.
On tic assembling of tho Court, 4 question
open and Close tho case. 4 motion had boon
onterod by the attorneys OF the Railroad Com.
pany to sot the caso down for trial at somo day
In thia terna- The counsel Tor tho people had
| ontercd 4 croBB-motion to quaBh tho writ OF
certiorari. The Court, aftcr comforting, decided
to moyo tho argument Oh
THE MOTION TO QUASI THE WRIT,
m tue determination Of ttIia question would set
tlo tho whole n1attor. sud, by this decision tho
Court awarded tho openlpg and closing to tho
counsel for tho people, aud tho Hon. Thos N.
! Springer delivered the opening argument in tho
case.
At tho conc1is'on Of Mr. springer'e argument.
Judge Edwards aud Mr. Hay, Tor ti!e Raroad
addressed tic Court. No now poiut Of
law wns adducod, and tho argument on Tho part
:. OF tho counsel for tho raiiroad waH confined to
tho Interpretation Of tho drat section OF tho law
8 history Of tho Legislature itsclf, and tho
construction by Tho courts. t!soy commended that
), that net clearly provides, by implication, for
such course us l:ad been taken In ths eauso-
n waro plausible. aud oatltloa tlom to sorious
r consideration. Tho Attorney General contonaea
that, if this cause waB properly now In tho 3ursa-
diction OF this Court, there WIS
!. NO CASE sCAncELY THAT COULD ARISE
- undor tho lawn Of tho State that could not be
J. tu1san hoyond tho control Of the State Coults
u "Wo are not permitted" lo sad. ITO
snz se1nda tno it truth Tho sf psson ss s'''"srs sa
~ n thin cause nor would be permitted to deny
u tho truth Of any petition which na.ght be led
I'd iu any cause sought to bs removed. II this
le doctrine prevails. then the State courts would.
L. hereafter, sit by your lcayo."
:, Those arguments kept tic point prominent
-, that this was case arising under thl
~ laws OF this State, over which tho state had &C.
" qutted jurisdiction, and that 1t was not such :
III caso brought 1t within The section under which
IN it WAS sought to be removed. Judge beckwish
:, - followed On tho part OF tho railroad, and Gov
- Palmer cioaed the argument for the people,
10 WAS IT WARRANTED pY Law?
OF As la proceeded, Judge Drummond ohsorTed
le that tho only question before tho Court "as az
10 to whether there was anY law Of CongroHa t
-. warrant tho issuance Of the writ OF Ccrtiorari
w Gov. Palmer said there Was no such act Of Con
gress the section nut by any contortol
ot reaaouing be made to include q case like this
Tile xacrodnesg Of contracta waB Az old ts th
In Government, and the court0, by series Of abl
VA and learned deciaions, had placod then whor'
i'1 '1 every citizen fot secure IN his right
he uudar lA contracts. This matter WAS to'
Of we'll md too securely sottled to mead any fur
~ tho law said oltizon sloud bo deprived Of I'll,
!, IT, right or immunity, it did not mean
~ right uudor contract. This law wai
no pasyed for no B,,ch purpose. The.
y who 1.-Two know Soi to what rights it related ant
or what olasa OF persons II WAS designed to protect
III and it ia needless 10 discuss them again. Int
H., Constitution Of this stato WIS
.hA sDvEnEIdN OYER ITS OWN clg1zENs.
ho aud provided that tho State should not bs aue'
eg before any court and yet in this case. one OF it
id, own citizens, the Chicago j. Alton Railtoh
~. Company, created unlor its laws, waR Beekin
I'm DO done. The p,titiou in THIS cause did 10 .
re- alloge TINT tho defendant had beon deprived o
od any tight, but that 1t would bn if tho case wa
ofr proceeded with ia the Stata Courta. Who hh'
tho right to assumo, in adyaneo that tue Judge
Of tho state Courts aud tue 1urta
's- ton OF tLe United states2 No one
al It saa an indignty hoapod upon the upright an'
H. abo Judiciary Of the State aud the honest oopl
- to 90 CHARGE II the defendant could under an
=, circumstances, avail himself OF the law OF Con
'a' -. gsoas, it would not bo
to UNTIL III WAS DEPRIVED OF soME RIGHT.
he The State wis tho onlY power that could Tn
cd uair coutract. and the most favorable roadin
Il Of the section in question could not be made t
49, comprehend or include case Of this kind
Efy Tic Court WOULD therefore, plainly SEQ ithal
rty for these reasons, tha act OF Congress could nc
,ut be n)a.to to oxtend to tho cAse at bar.
pst At the conclusion OF the argumout, tho Conr
is took the case nndor advisoMent; yet 1t wa
" nlauly ayideut, from tho character Of tho sug
gesttnna mRdo BY tho Court AZ tho argnmen
proYroHsed, that they would docnc to taGo lnrit
dieton, or 1t WA generally 40 Interpreted. Ihof
lio was no intin,aton as to when tho decision "ou
IT, he rondero1.
T. THE WISCONSIN LAW.
or, MORE QUITS AGAINST TICKET BELLEhs.