, 1874-08-11
Court to take jurls1iction OF this caao, by In.
f1,t1rtfun tint nnYcr hniuR m original writ.

Court to take jurladiction OF this caso. by In.
Junction, TINT nover hoing an original writ.
or iho PURPOSE Of te9ing t., lug tl'o question. Tho
both Of Gen. Smith and Mr.. Sloan thiB question
Could you upon moro affidavit or upou f1e state
nent Ut acts, moso IN open Court Ior writ OF
quo warranto, writ Of cortiorari, or Of pro-
l,ibittoni and, II you could, could you do
injunction, mud 1t you could not, does TINT tlis-
tiiction not 20 far toward illustrating tho anoa-
ton whothor this Court Possesses tllo Banlo i,l-
rIsto;ion & Ct Injunction TINT 1t docs of othor
This assumption Gen. Smith donled, and eur-
ported lIs postlon by numerous authoritfes.
Next, 10 enumerated what wore comploto roms.
dios' Quo warranto would in effect DO oonl-
Potter law. or to ceaao running. Maudamus
would also DO complete romody. II would 10
eaying, substantially. by command from thia
court you mttst run your road 10 accoIdhnco
with the Potter law. Iruo. those roaedloa
might not, as had boon rail. accomplish tho pro-
ctso results but thoy would DO now tho loss Of
fcctual. II this Court could issue an Injunction
III the case, they could iHslo against tho State
restraining htm from usiug tllcho Ingredients
prohibited by law, also a,nilarly agall,at eyory
rotailer Of ardent splrits. compelling him to re-
gard tho Liquor INV. It would bo stfanEo doc
trno, indeed, If tho railroad companies arc to bo
governed by ttlfefons laws, beca''ss they arc
public corporations, oxorciaad for tho public
good.
ANOTHER REASON
why tho Injunction should not be granted Wns,
that suit Of quo warranto. was pondlng in this
Court agatnat theso companies and there was no
apparent reason Willy that. action should ihsvo
beou proBHed to Judgment.
Attorney-dopotal Sloan aaid thoy could in-
cludo that suit in this action II defendants do
sired.
under tho statute. Referring to this question Of
Legislative control Of corporations. he said I:
"Haa it come to this. that becauHo carry un a
public business which rcaults in tho public good,
my property boa1znoH public property, subject to
selfish business, business which is oven in
furious to tho public iutoraat, my property ia
mine, and the public have no power Of control
over it wllatever2" uo was awaro eot1o courts,
amid Excitement, had said tho railroad corpora
State, II such wore tho law, It wore better they
wore In reality public property, and that tho
pnblic wou!d take the property Of onea, than to
tako 1t In this. cruel. .1nderhanaod way, BY
1r.m tlom without, Just compensation, forcing
thom into bankrnptcy and destructlon:
II thoy ara indeed public property, no would
appeal to the State Of Wisconsin, and tho a,1-
tlorittea representing tt, to deal hettor, moro
to the pubnc than to seek thus to deatroy Il.
They say 80, but do not think 70. They act aa
II they thought it was tho property Of Tie cor
poration,, for they never would deal with thotr
own property In that way. II the State has
THE POWER OF L1EE AND DEATH OVER coRroRA~
IS claimed by Judge dixon, and NJ one else,
ought not tho pooplo to DO satisfied with that
without stretching it further, by saying re havo
tic right to destroy you, but wo do not want
do that, No only want 10 torment you to death,
as,d It 10 cannot do It by law, by any
thing tho Legislature has done, We want
Court Of Chaneery to assume jurisdicsion Of
we Gun torment you to death oquttably They
asaumo thoy cannot do 1t at q court Of law. all
honor to court Of law. 1t remains to DO soon
whether 1t can be done anywhere in our State.
The horr Of adjournment having arrived.
Con. Smith said ho would occupy an hours
timo In the morning In concluding Its srgu-
mont.
Ahsatant Attorney -Ganatal Sloan doubted
whether ho could review tho case, aud conclude
the argument fo1 tue State during the remainder
Of tho day.
Chiof-Justico Rynn haid tho Court was
anxious TINT al1 atgument should ba in by to-
morrow night, hut this is doubtful.