, 1874-10-07
Arguments Before the Supreme Court
Yesterday,
No Conclusion Reached..-Mr.
Cooks Brief.
Engfish Shareholders Of Erie Justify The
Late Dividends.
Miscellaneous Items.

|
| Special Dispatth to The Chieano TRIBUNE.
| OTTAWA, Oct. CA difference OF contB
demanded Of n passenger for ride of 6 miles
upon tho Chicago, Burlington Il Quincy Rail-
| road was malb tho basiH Of an of1ort to test Tic
conHtitutionnlity Of tho Illinois Rnllrond law.
Judgment Of $40 mud costa Ind been rendered
on tho trial Of tho cauae before Jus.ice Of tho
Peace, which waa affirmed by tho Bureau County
Circuit County
| AN ArrEAn wAs TAKEN
to tia Supreme Court, aud the caBo CANA up for
hearing this morning.
Attornoy-Q General Edsali tIen1urred to the test
ing Of q question In which tho people Of Illinois
had 30 rlolnentous mn interest by moar,s Of d
little $40 suit. Besides, tho main question at
issue hetwaon tho corporations and the State did
| not arlso In this case.
| This latter position yyna combatcd by tho Hon.
D. @. Cook, Of Chicago who reoited the charters
| Of tho sovernl companies. which, BY: cousolita-
ttol,, comprise the r.esont Chicago, Burlington
& Quincy Railroad Company, to Show that tho
right to fix reasonable rites Of compensation for
| transportation was conferred upon tho COM
JnnieH, md that these charters woro public AcEs;
therefore, tho Court waB obliged to take cogui.
! zanco Of thom. This rms
TILE ONLY IMPORTANT QUESTION
| in the oaao, and tho only ono counsel for tho
corporation proposed or cared 10 discuss.
| lilo Acknowledgement had insisted that tho
| charter of tho Aurora Branch 1ailroad Ia not .
public act mud therefore tho Court cannot tako
judicial notice Of it.; and If may bo TINT the as-
| eaut was committed Oh this branch Of tho rona,
| and that this particular chnrter contained no
special power to fix rates Of transportation. Tho
iianifostly sufficient Answer is that, If on three
| quarters or any loss portion OF tlle road tho
act Of tho conductor WAS la"fnl, as it clearly
would hayo been on that portion Of
tho road formerly tho Central Military
Tract Railroad, then, before the conductor could
eoution must show that tho act was committed
| where it WAS not lawful. ....
1t was not charged TINT tho Railroad Company
demanded MI unreasonable rate Of fare, because
tho difference IN tho Company's rate and that
iixod by the State WAS only cents Tie issue
presented was clearly whether
THE LEa1sIATunr had 4 RIGHT
to fix Nil ntlexible tariff of ratee of fare to ho
Hallway Company. Starting uitl tho promise
that tho Constitution Of tho United States is tho
euprcma law Of tho 1and, and tho United states
Supreme Court is ths highest authority,
| Mr.. Cook demonstrated that tho pro-
vision Of railroad company's charter
yhicl, authorized it to fix rntes Of faro for the
transportation of passengers il part Of contract
with tho State, which il within tho protection OF
which declares no State al,all pasa any Inv i'm
pairing tile obligation Of conttucta. ThlH doo-
tr,ne was declared III tho Dartmouth college
cpso, and hnB Hfuco
l BEEN TEE SETTLED Law
in tho Unitod States Supreme Court. No doubt
las been expressed that the doctrine OF tho
Dartmouth College caHo applies 10 ordinary
contracts; but it haB been insisted that the
doctrine of that caao does not apply to raiiroad
! charters and that they arc not private cospora-
lions within tho meaning OF tho term used in
the Dartmouth CAGE The legal distinction ba-
tweou public aud private corporation is this rs
! dennol in
sn. COOKS BRIEF:
E1tNArnf!nuN tUncti1HpS created bV Tia
Of tue Legislature thcrc being other party whose
Il = M T ans ~ rsdpn of
lines, 10 10 changed nolIcd, repealed. These
Ut contract-an net Of tie Legislature Tie part,
anlan acceptance, a acting uncr TIC otler pnrt
h1s y ~
purpose 10 ID accomplished. CHOOSES to acconit
j. through the action Of private parties These be-.
parties for The publio purpose, coufera upon the mr.
p eta 4 nenst 10 tlo pbo Is moving COW
sideratiou side that of expected remuneration
for The outlay is tic consideration on the other. Ts
cot.sfitutes contract which eau neither be modified,
chanGsd nor alnulet by enc purity without tie con
The so1o object Of the Legislature in granting tho
cllartcr, may be tho ,Bo nn cncAt which will rcsut
to tue PUBLIC from tho construction Of the railroad,
but where the profs thereof belong to private llli
vual stocholcrp, the corporation is private and uot
public -
Nr. Cook then Showed, by repeated ueC1SOnB OF the
suprcme Court Of the United staes TINT the doctrlo
q IL aSs Saisea s' Sta sts.es xhsh rsasis
Of contract does apl!y to tie charters Of railroad
corporations and Thai ibis is tho construction given to
that clau4e Of thu Constitution Of tho United States by
tho Supreme Court wloye constitutional right 1t fa to
gye authoritative construction Of TINT instrument.
M s1ns fa en- fen sae u nne rsp0
prcnlo Court upon this question have hecn equally
eear mud distinct Aftcrsard by citations from .hs
Supreme Court dccIsloa Of nilccrn States he showed
tha tho rulo stated had been universally recognized
Tlo gsstioi; as T. s presented TED tn ts record IL
out any suggestion Thai lilo Railroad Company has In
any violated the terms Of Its charter to repeal
80 much of the Charter a. eonfers upon ths eosr9ra-
csko of this kind without any suggestion that
ps iewefs 'coperrea s "a u s esartsr en
course thors II limit to thu power u tue 1oslsla-
sr n9 at IT, Il :sr.5 sS1
alter the charter at ALL 1t !s ciear that IT, power ts IN
~ hat tsF1rd II M s
viewed BY tue eouftH, and tho rest,lt Is reached ):
that tho tmsHe n amount Of enRa' 3,a' lpysssa ;1
ii the sancficn and guaranty Of eharters whis, III eunrs
lave concurred III proIouneing to be c1ntracs Which
only accor!!ne 10 tho e1pfoaaion Of tho popular will.
mud 1nay, by tho result Of town meeting, bs nntlo Of
no value IN day. Tho princ!e becomes csanlislica,
tho law; and when once tho BARRIERS which
guard tle posscsson Of SPECIES Of property Ars
iroon down, security will DO afforded by tho 4w
to the l'onEcsalon Of my other cass Of property. OF
eu,rae, thoso can no appeal from tue decision o.
tho Legislature to the decision Of Jury, or Of court
upon tho qucst!on hoher tho rates se BY The leSis.
ature arc reasonable or unreasonable, tue LeEiala-
tnro has tho power to fix theac rates. Il It laa lhc
power to fiji tho rate ut which tho persona! serslce
OF the ngcntA OF this railroad company shall be rencr-
ed, and the compensation which thu coupsny sna r.
ccivs for lo work 1T performs, for the ae Of tta
prorefy md tor Tho risk it incrs, y has tho f'gh 10
DO ths sasnn thing for every natural rer.o Il tAa
Legislature DEGREES thht tho services alln lie reAdere
and the Iroperty used without adcanAts com,
prnsattop, there Ii no rovien Of Its decision, Rnt
the value Of tho property IN destroyed ut once, md
tho guarantee Of tho rights Of property aud lug asnliF
and Of the untte States, hecomea thn ruercss sham
md 1el.ston This question to.ay affects thy rights
oE tho storihoitlcss Of ra|lroan companies III
Ills stntn to tho benefcial nso Of tlcir prop
cIty. :, To.1notrow 1t may atsect the right,
Company ix doprye1 Of tho beneficial uso o
ia railroad to-day. my minority 0f .l.o poo|o WIKI
may become unpopular with tho majority may bt ie
1Elvea OF tlhlr pt0pNrty Whclleyer TIM InanriY sG