, 1875-05-17
The United States Circuit Court, at Dos
Moines, Decides In Favor Of
Council Bluffs.
Tho l1issouri-Rfver Dridgc Declared TO
10 Part Of The Limo Of
the HUa,l.
And tho Company Ordered to Operate 1ts
Whole Road as Ono Continuous
Line.
Tho Opinion as Delivered by Judge
Dillon,

spsetsl Correspondence Of TAs caftnep 1t1ouns.
DEs Mo1xEs, IT,, May l8.-Judga Dillon this
rnornlng delivered Tie opinion In tho caso Of tho
United Ssatoe, OK rel. Hall et al., rs. tbs Union
Pacific 1lairoal Company, to crowded court
room. I send the head-notea and opinion, emit
ting Tho statement OF tho casc.
HEAD pNoTss.
!. The chart OF the u1iou Pacific Railroad Com
pany {l2 Statutes at Largo 49, Sec. II required
ita "Iown Dranch to bo constructed Westward
from point on the wcstorh boundary Of tho
State Of Iowa to bn fixod by Tie President OF The
Unitod States" Hold, on consideration Of
various provisions OF tho charter, that tLa onat-
orn ttfminuo OF said branch was on tho Iowa
shoro Of tho Missouri Rivcr,-uot on tho Nc
braska nhoro, uor at roiut on the middle Of
tho main channel" Of the river, although that
WAS tho legal wastoru boundary Of tie Bta,o Of
Iowa.
q Tho right to erect bridge across tho Mis-
aour to the eastern terminus OF tho Iowa branch
on Tho Iowa shorc, was giyon to tho Union Pa
clio Railroad Company, ly implication, In tho
original chartor OF tho Company, and ran ox-
prfssly conferred by tho 9th section Of tLn
amended chatter Of the Company, Of July 2, 1861
(la Statutes At Largo, s5o) tLs powers given and
the duties inpohed by tilese acts In respect to
privileges wore recognized, incroastd, and reg
ulate1, but not roroaled. by tho special act Of
Feb. a, 1871, entitled EAU net to authorizes the
Union Pacific nAiload Company to issue bonds
to construct bridge ncross tha Missouri itiY or
at Olnahs, keb., and Council Bluffs, In. {l0 Stat
utcs at Large, 431).
.. THIS lasl-naned net, construed In connoc-
t.on will the other legislation OF Congre.s, and
held not to change tho eastern terminus Of the
Iowa branch Of tho Union Pacific 1satltoa1 COM
pany from tlo Iowa shore Of tho Missouri River
nor to disoonuoct tue bridge from tho road Of
tAo Company, go as to 1oilege tho Company from
the duty imposed by it's cLasfor, aud othor acts
OF ConGtcss, to operate Its whplo railroad as
"on1 continuous finc."
4. 4 pcrcmptory n,anlamns to compel tho
Union Pacific 1:aliroai Company to operate Its
road over tho bridge in tho sn.ne gcucrnl man
ncr that IL operates Ao other portions Of tho
road, wAs granted; md tic devise OF separate
transfur over TIM bridge by local trains hatd to
10 III violation Of tile duty OF tho Company to
tho pablo.
6. Amen dments In form and substance NAV bo
allomol in lnnndatnus proceedings In any step
thereof whero Justice will thereby be pru-
moted: iu this c2ao, tho alternative wit waa
amended by lcayo Of Court, by atriktng out pars
OF iss mandate, AMI tho pereutory writ, instead
Of being dcnlcd, hacauso tho alternative writ
was too broad. WIS ordoied to bo iaaued IN con-
fosmlty to tho alternative W,lt as a,noudcd.
oPih!oH OF THE COURT.
Df'len, Circuit judge.
III cturuyes.y which ns excited intense local feel
int aud ens involving such large interests, and to
Of tho Fall1o AID Of Cougrss and which as hceI H0
freely argued at thu Lar the Court would b juasited
" s,ttatins IT, wa Wofe sn usual fa!lnosa tho grounds
naI md II ii i, understood tl,at The ,,rauccssrul nsr
~ whiehcser It be will carry the order here sadc
noso 10 dircs. tho case with tlat degres Of eabors.
t1oh We 'hou olaor%ito do. aud which iR inttinslo
Importance would we'll warrant,
%e jzocse4 to no.icu the matc1ial aucstious In
yo!yot 10 Tue application for tie percmptory wrl II
tae road which tho respondent bound to operate as
es - its counsel Aayu couteasa in uler words il.
nndaT tAa ACTS pf congrcss applicable to tho re.
r. n.ronaesst; nales !, u WV uot sushostzed 10 build
lie tscrt MY b. concedsI tl.st W ;ho % Sos %nna
Is. that tue 5eIas1,s would not 30 eutlt'ed to tho
chartur oi tic Company aIrs tha oe.,ms,osnent Of
what Is thaEaln tarmoL tho Iowa branch - This
9aes9 ~ = answered @ y H. ol"wipg nnHasse ta sho
rhny hereby authorized aud REQUIRED 70 cpnstEucta
s!ng!o aae of railroad and telegraph from point on
BY Tho pruatlont oi the uais sAtes,n ia ts Ttscu.
We ore! ?f Now H. Io8! and Aard u 1884 ptcsldsn.
Lincoln DID not undertake to change this prdtplou,
ordcea named tho western boundary of t4c Btaio of
Iowa as "the Point from which Tho Co1np1ny should
construct laelF branch road to tho Tooth merdn" In
aapHtaolyshen, thD Dcomuoucemcnt-ront Of tho Towa
branch L. on the weateru boundary Of lhe sAte Of
toT. X. ,pt IT, y language y sssEpye
section 8ec. which pEoytdes for tho Luid,ag Of
~ bsasl and prescribe: tts connencemsnt cosssp,
Isy Do ot sny, Il, aranent thst the ~ eonmenra coa
ineus.ron OF tic road, prescribed by Tho ferms Of
ths charos. Is upon Tho Western boundary OF Iowa:
bpuisry u that State, and lony thas hs language
means tue casern uhofo Of ehe Iiyer. Tho ar0ut,on
ct s Gs"Esns r counsel on III. subject bsst
Wtttsrn boundary Of tho Biats of Iowa IL He middle
gt sls clannSl q sae M!l,oa. ser p Kta.utes It
poInt, to ba 11ol by the President In Tie mdi,e Of
tic nAn shaulel Of the river. Dut It Il said tat IA
tmpraetisale and yoa must rut your initial poInt on
t. S s soss :, I IT, s 4 III se'
Grant Of thia lud l. 10 be atr!csy construed. You
s.n always lcepina Within thsn, Il i i. mprsc.iea.
~ III IL Ns1ts.aa T. .aos Of tho % you
II u d granted that Cougrcss, by Tho use Of tho
worta, '.pan OIL the wcatern boundary Of tho slate
Hcnt of tho 1oVFa branch" meant To rpfcF 10 tno
legal boundary Of tho State dsoars In l14U Il Hst
4es LARGE OH tno fttHt OF cen1Rel Wou4 le sound
Ant II tatro Is nothing 10 shcW that Congress 1oaant
somo otler than tbs legal boundary, therv would to
strong presumption that the legal boundary rsk tha
ono here ntentisd. There IL, however, Il! tho yar1ois
provisions Of tlo chaster OF tha OapanY eyidenrs ~
vary s.tistaotsry clsr.etsr tha Congress- IL tho sa
guugo lnles consideration. referred to tae BOUND
NY es ths ssate Gu ..tho r.yoE. EstAer than
o. tue i4aal hac In thu middle Of The chan.
MI. Il Aad no question Of Territorial juriadtc.
t!ou hsfoEo It, snd heco ta ettchtion was reobshv
not drawn to ts act Of lse 1xng tha legal houndsry
Col8rots, In the charter Of The respondent Mcai,t
a.Aer thu Iowa sboFa Or ths ulIdIs Ut tho chanuej
Ct tho r!ysr.' and "from po'ut On ts ono o. tha
other authorized nnd required lilo ro4d to Le BULL.
Bearing III Hinl tho nature of railroad, and tho ~
1scts for which this road VA. created and aaed ty
CAngrese viii 1lot do to lnputs to that body upon
doubtful lanxuagc, the singuas Tho lnc1plcahls pur.
1ss of requiring the road to " built 10 po!nt On tie
iui4ale of ~tds and rapld stream liks tAo Mis-
aour Ons shore or tho other Of Tho rser wa4 ucant
y whIeh7 II the Nebra.ta shose, Why
y lows mentioned u ALT II ths NsbEasta shore,
what proprlsty l. tlere in referring 10 tie lows
hoanaary. or III calling thu road "tLe luwa b{anchHf
=. A9!M t1u sstElo ret provides for clpso aud iu.-
HeulAto aaslern cunueotlUA1 with tho other
branches. The northern brnnch Il 70 Ia Constructed
" t1a very Company "froM Sioux U!ty,n which N iu
Iowa on tho caAtesn ahorn Of tho Masoft lycr whco
,sa% e oi s9aa from alnnsso.a lons shall bc com
htesl1n u pE1TIa.l for the Mihsouri hanrHsx .t a.
nil Eht1uR