New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-07-19
already sold, they could not deliver, because Oh
mo refusal of the companies to transport 'nen-
rur .pcrNRNr OF EX-JUpGE sHIRMAN.

lhc refusal of the companies to transport them-
THE ARGUMENT OF Ex-JUDGE sHrHMAN'
The defence took the form of a motion to quash
the Indictment TO which Judge Shipmau drec,eo
his argument after his opening statement. lie OBJ
bected to the granting of the application. ana moved
that it be quashed on the ground that the moving
oaners did not state any ground OF law or fact on
which the court could grant the writ PRAYED TOR
After reviewing the allegations of the moving aud-
Wits he continued as follows:
nv direct allegation and legitimate inference the facs
a they appear by the of the aegsnohs
That the respondent co npany hat car
,tanay refused 10 discharge its duties as
er aud 10 material degree suspended the exercise Oh
lis These allegations are onthe face VI o
moving papers, untrue in any just or leSh scsv
lar from refusing TO discharge its duties as c3 tUe
Barrier. 1t has, In spite OF us s,d ed.Iared in dis
contrary, been Temporarily hndered ana uel.,Iayas
charging portion OF it's duties by its ior1er "s Of
IL has In no proper sense suspended tue rc;sea ali
it, franc Uses Though from embarrsssmrnt eau eu
by tins sIrike it has been Temporarily u stee The
Diapers concde tst the railroad companies nave re e
ployed to take the places cd ne conspiracy for
which they all indictaoie ~ h,,p enSaged in
aiio inGicaents against them than In his present
occupation
Jndce shipman contended that railroads
ma cninmop carriers in the transaction OF tner
business had the same rights SUBJECT 70 Tue samo
CONTROL as priva,e individuals unu5r lhe SAM oli
cumsTances Were the New-York, Lake Ere anG
Western road run by private persons VINO h',u
purchased the land on winch IL runs between mere o
aud Buffalo in fee simple, /. would iowa aV d
stand IN any dinere does i1 noW The TACT
that the State OF New-York contributed S3,ooo'ooo
toward lis construction dld not aifeci te eaSe' ~
it ha, been decided and over aga that ~ncro
State subscribed 10 the caDltai oil r1uroai COM
pany IL did 10 as an individual JUDGE on,pnis r
cited two cases 'lhe r eS p T ''i" VS.
The su ,auehanna Railroad, o. New-lorh IohI
20 show tnat this not case In nhicn tno peop
OF the State were interested that tne AG'oLu1S
Il x,.
fiA Noboay III the state of New OK had any iosa
interest in the controversy except l1 opp 80 ar
consiynees of pzrtIculaT goods over TINS p@thCuai
Ia nf railway The people had no rlght
10 invoke the courts III redress OF CIVIC wfons oo
tanned by some elnzens az Tue hn m'io controversy
over alleged civic wrongs sustained 10y Messrs r. D.
Thurber' John Jones and John Smith. by reason Oh
things not done. Judge Shipman cohtihueu'
But the case having been already tried
in the newspapers. We know what tue
Attorney General wants. 1t is mandamns
future But q never issues msndamus until a
specific wrong nas been committed ana then the man
There are no allegations IN the papers that the
carried but only tina of Thurber Nichols and Maxfeld
II then these wrongs, they are wrongs oil In
feme,iiaSle at the suit Of the parties only
The general duties OF the AtorneyGe are pre-
sSoed the psss ISL seeoSs to g. 70 Il ana
They authorize sucn proceeding as TINS. The only
corporations generally found Article A. Tide
g Of the Cooe of Procedure But these provisions relate
70 formal IL expressly provided tSecNon
is0ol that they small be triabe OF right by jury
s"eTa q can oe Drawn from the the respondent
is corporation Is not PGSlS ous n prV sss
SAD ii the foundation is private the corporation
is privaie however extensive the uses may DC
of the nstuton II will doubtless be said that railroad
though private are common carriers ana
tSs can De claimed from this they stand carriers
the ground subject to the same duties ana iao
al
and liabilities affected by some particular statute,
And # il is said through present difficulty the
rssaon,ent company failed to comply with the stat
utes the conclusive that II that be graz ed
this is not the remedy which the Attorney General Is
authorized to pursue.
It viii douDcss also be said that the temporary ina;
bility of this railroad instantly receive and carry all
the goods Offered 10 II, not only enoarrasses the par
tcuas and congnees In Question 9ui tends 70
divert trade tie City and state Inat NOTION is
pui forward in the petition In afhiavlis. But 1t is
@ and remote circumstances which furnisnes no legal
Intervention OF the Attorney Geneia
control the commerce the state through the
medium perenpJ0ry mandates, issued IN the nane
single Illustration will puncture this bubble. Inns are
kept by private individuals ana by corporations IN one
sese they duly perform, under which they
bound by receive aud provide Tor guests suppose
camberrnads in oil hotels suddenly strike, that
the prOpretors cannot, Tor TIE time bling receive ana
provide for travellers The latter may seek PhliaeI-
phia Dos On, Baltimore, and Otner Giles, To make ther
purchases and trade ana commerce are t1us diverted
irosu city and state, are TIE Attorney General ana
courts auInorI,d TO remedy slcn dincuty Ny per
emptOry anandamusf Again. all Tue great INES OF water
alton winch " ana frUIn Iir city are of
cours carriers, and under The sae legal dults
sna llsO hes as railroads. many of Them are owned
and operated by corporations. suppose Their employ %
sndden combine and engage III b1rKe and Lnls delay
ncb of Things WOULD partc-
ular shippers travellers, dlreety anu indirectly IN
CITY and Sa1e time being Are SUCH complic''-
tons and dihcul 10 be remeded oy tho writ OF man,
amus ia the name vi Tue people anu al VIC hlsSanoe VI
the Attorney -Generaf
Judge Shipman further announced and defended
the following Propositions OF law:
ANY application for u In.ndamus must set forth the
SPECIFIC wrong 10 De reneded oy IT,
The writ must confined 10 the redress OF the par
tteulr wrong ior6h the appicatOn so that the
mandate of the be applied " the specnc
called for In the Application
Mauaamus issues except TO enforce the per-
formanee specific act whoa the party respondent
hss refused 10 perform -,
General TO application Is admitted tnen he mas
no cast ON wcn ahe 0o can ass sncb an
tlon can rest, provides Tor the issuance o. snch
swriI Only the applicants right thereto depends
upon questions OF law whether carrier Is bound 10
cary particular goods al cular time or forthwith
tiou of mixed Jaw fact IL depends upon the charac
ter OF goods rendered 1le time wnen tney
were presented the order OF precedence in winch they
were 10 carried III view o AN excessive accumulation
NJ frigut and capacity oI tue carrier
the pa - ,ran ~ ,art mus kpow before il can act
Sscally or intelh tlycrcunsf wucL the
papers before Court sned NO iient Whatever.
TIE CONNECTION WITH THE STRIKE.
In conclusion Judge Shlpnan discussed the
uestion of the striking freight-handers. Read
ing the references to the strike IN the application
and the affidavit OF John McArdle, lac said:
Here we have real character OF this appeal to the
tiscTe on of fully disclosed Ii pure and
siue tnat THIS Respondent company shall per-
rn,ti.,o 10 select employees at suca reasonable
d DC agreed upOn ACCORDING
nnIy,rsai course business every civilized
,,ifv Dut TIA. shall be compelled Dy pressure
i,nitla man employ certain class VI
-. of com arbl. rary dictated themselve
the Court invoked Tor tnat purpose On what prn-
ripss oil freedom Justice or sound policy Can court VI
s,Ifics Ieud Itse the VI coeIcng cltss OF
Gersops 10 enter INTO contracts with another class
fsrms dictated by tho latter Inat is tne end