The new dominion. [volume] (Morgantown, W. Va.) 1876-1904, 1880-12-18

sion or imposition. Nor does the
Railroad belong to the State, MOI
never did. The franchise which it
granted to the builders is all that ev-
er belonged to the State, and that is
all TINT can possibly be forfeit by the
builders. What was that franchisef
Not the road, but simply and only
the privilege to construct the road
and operate it as Railroad, with the
right to charge reasonable tolls or
freight, including the power,o of course,
to condemn lands along such route
sufficient to built it on. So when the
franchise is forfeited the State gains
nothing, unless to regain its original
right of eminent domain which the
State may a grant againway, but the
bed of the road, free from the ease
ment, reverts to the owners of the
land when the franchise was granted,
or their grantees, while everything
else, including rails, cars, locomo-
tives and other fixtures of such road,
remains the rightful property of the
company or builders, as before, who
lose the franchise or easement, and
nothing more. And yet the Judge
says the State will take charge of the
Railroad, and run it as she pleases.
1t may be true, in sense, that Rail
roads are quasi public highways, so
that the public have the right to trav-
ell on them by paying such reasona-
bic charges as it's owners or prophet
ors may see fit to charge them, but
it is nevertheless true that Railroads,
built by private persons or corpora
tions, are private property, and do
not in any proper sense belong to the
State, like public inns or ferries, and
such is the almost even tenor of the
judicial minds of the country. For
upon this theory, Courts universally
hold Railroads as common carriers to
stricter diligence (diigentia dill
gentisimi) than any other class OF
kind of carriers. The Courts say, as
to common carriers by water or coach,
that while they own their boats,
hacks, gearing, &c, and must sec
that they are kept in good and safe
condition, they do not own the water
course nor the pike or road, on or
over which they are not compelled
to n,and have no control over them
and, therefore, less strictne5s is re-
quired of them, while as to carriers
by Railroads. they not only own the
cars and locomotives, and control
them, and are bound to keep in good
and safe condition and repair, and
managed by careful and competent
engineers. But that they also own
the road and road bee, land are bound
to see that they are kept in good and
safe condition and repair, and so
having the full control of everything
pertaining to said road; public good,
as well as simple justice, requires
that such carriers shall be held to
the diligence of the most diligent, OF
to the strietest diligence, and made
to- answer for the lowest degree Of
negligence (culp larisima). The
Judge, at the outset says that Rail
way companies have legally vested
rights, and like other vested rights OF
property, are sacred, and then says
''But on this question Railroad mer
understand their situation. They
believe, or pretend to believe, thai
Railways are the property of the
companies authorized to run them
which is a cardinal error, and the
parent of much false argument. A
public highway cannot be private
property, and a Railroad laid out ant
built by the authority of the State
for the purpose of commerce, is a:
much public highway as turnpike
road, canal or navigable river. But
in any case the Railroad belongs te
the State" Again he says: "Tht
corporations who have got into tn,
habit of calling themselves the own
ers OF the Railroads, have no propri
etary right, title or claim to the road:
themselves, but mere franchise an
nexed thereto and exercisable there
on. They are the agents of the State
for the performance of public duty
If the franchise be forfeited or sur
rendered, or if 1t expire by afflux o
time, the State takes possession o
the road, and runs it herself, or EN-
ploys q new agent. The company
cannot keep the road any more thar
an out going collector of a Port cal