Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1880-04-16
HOW TO CUT WIRES IN A TELE-
GRAPH WAR.

HOW TO CUT WIRES IN A fEbE-
GRAPH WAR.
The telegraph war which has been
raging between the rival lines more or
less intensely at points all over the coun-
try has been especially bitter at ST.
Louis. 49,
The United States Court at that city
has Just rendered an important decision
in a case between the Atlantic and Pa
cifc Telegraph Company, as plaintiff
r,rsls the American Union Telegraph
Company and the Union Pacific Rail-
way Company, as defendants, which
gives the plaintiff almost everything
claimed by it in the pleadings, and is re-
garded by that corporation as a decided
victory.
The interesting pointin the decision
is that il explodes the theory, which
such corporations have seemed 10 act
upon in their controversies, that tele-
graph lines may be seized by parties
claiming interest therein and appropri-
ated without regard to legal proceed
;nea. possession being regarded as con-
elusive title.
The st. Louis case involved points
very similar to the cases at other places.
The A. < p. Company had an existing
contract with the Union Pacific road to
operate its wires, which had been kept
TO the letter, without complaint, for sew
eral years. The Railroad Company
changed hands to some extent, and the
Western Union Telegraph Company
sought TO obtain the contract for opera
ing the wires. and did contract with the
railroad company, and the telegraph
line was turned over to the Western
Union, which latter company proceeded
to cut the wires connecting with the
offices Of the A. & p. Company which
still held contract with the railroad.
The case grew out Of the above facts,
and the railroad company went into
court claiming that it had exceeded its
authority in leasing its telegraph line to
the A. & p. Company, and the contract
was therefore invalid.
The main point, however. and that IN
which we are interested, is as to wheth-
er a railroad or telegraph company can
be permitted TO rescind a contract on its
own motion, and take possession OF
lines, offices and property, without due
process Of law, even though it may deem
the contract under which it is held, in
valid.
This would hardly be a question be-
tween private individuals, but corpora
tons nowadays, and hereabouts, seem
to proceed upon the theory that they
are entitled both to interpret and exc
cute the laws. This decision will be Of
some service, therefore, on that head,
and We append so much Of the opinion
Of the court as bears upon 1t:
Fiith-The contention of the railroad
company is that il should be permitted
TO take possession of the property in
controversy without process OF legal
proceedings. While am clear that the
contracts under which the property is
held by plaintiff are ultra wires, there IL
a dispute upon that subject and such a
dispute as in my judgment cannot be de-
termined by the railroad company OF its
own motion. The right OF recession
does not justify the railroad company in
taking possession except by lawful
means. The plaintiff has right
10 be heard upon issue joined
in a proper proceeding before be-
ing elected. The present question Is
not whether the contracts should IN
such a proceeding he rescinded and the
property restored, to the railroad COM
pany, but whether this should be done
by the railroad company upon its own
motion and in a way 10 deprive the
plaintiff not only of hearing in the
regular cause in this court, but also to
deprive il OF the right Of appeal. Ii is
one thing for me TO hold that the con-
tracts are in my judgment ultra rtres and
quite another 10 say 10 the railroad
company "IOu NAV turn the plaintiff
out and take possession without giving
il DAY in court.
The principles settled by these and
many other causes is that party who
ia in actual possession Of property