Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1884-09-12
DAILY POST. INTEluGEhCER
MIST FuRS,.H EQUAL FACILIIiEs

trict. an exhaustive opinion has been
rendered. II comprises. including syi-
labus. ffty-six pages of printed matter,
and IN a model OF ineisive thought and
language.
We can briefly touch upon the most
important points. In December, losZ,
plaintiff fled a complaint praying thai
defendant be epioinsd preliminarily
and perpetually from interfering with
the enjoyment by plaintiff, on defend
ants then and thereafter 70 be con-
structed lines, of previous and existing
facilities for transacting its express
business. A preliminary injunction
was granted, which the defendant
promptly moved the court to dissolve
Owing TO press Of business, no decision
Was rendered until September. when
the Court denied the motion to dissolve
the Injunction, bat modified il 30 a. to
limit il TO such of defendants lines, de
pets, wharves, ETC., as were constructed
and In use September LIST, 1898. Where
mon plaintiff Immediately moved to
reinstate the original injunction. Argu-
ment was had upon plaintiffs second
motion last December, prior to which
time an amended and supplemental
complaint bad been fled. The defend
ant moved TO strike ont every allegation
of acts and things occurring SINCE the
original complaint was filed. which mo
ton the Court denied.
The PRAYER of the complaint Was that
defendant be dscreed to carry piaintin
express matter, messengers or agents
in charge thereof, at just and reason
able rate Of compensation, and afford
necessary facilities therefor on all ITS
steamships, steamboats, and passenger
trains; that defendant. Its officers,
agents and employees, be enjoined and
restrained from interfering With the en-
ioyment by plaintiff OF the facilities
heretofore and nov accorded to II for
transaction of its business, and from
excluding or ejeoting its express matter
or messengers from defendants depots,
wharves, trains, cars, vessels or lines,
then existing or that may hereafter be
constructed; and that defendant be com
PEELED 20 afford plaintiff full and ample
facilities, upon all its trains and cars,
for transportation Of its messengers
and express matter on anv or all OF its
roads through from Tacoma to Duluth
hy continuous line. The Court grants
the application for injunction in ac-
cordance with the prayer o. the com
plant. and makes it perpetual.
As before remarked, the opinion II
important and exhaustive. IL discusses
and defines ''comity," franchise" "ex
press business" ETC., at considerable
length. OF the duty of railroad cor
porations the Court says:
A railway proprietor's undertaking is
Qauoed every way by reference to actual
public requirements. Being exclusive
proprietor Of both a highway and its
furniture, his undertaking embraces due
equipment and operation of the road up
TO limit which public convenience
calls il to reach, or forbids 1t to pass,
and up ~ this limit is embraced all
facilities for transportation of all sorts
OF freight. He must 30 conform with
the general sense Of what Ia convenient
and proper that his conduct Of his road
shall not be a source Of public irrita-
ton, nor amount to an obstruction OF
that which should be IN very deed the
peoples highway. Such would be- the
relation and duties of the defendant
were IL net public creature and we're 1t
not the owner Of the road b. private
proprietary title. Such emphatically
are its relations and duties as railway
corporation created for special public
business and subsidized from the public
wealth and made the organ OF state
paramount power
The position is taken and ably main
tanned that whenever y special fran
ehise In bestowed. whereby private
property or private rights are TO be alb
sorbed or interfered with, q public use
la thereby shown and public servant
created. This IL true OF highways, tolls
for maintenance of which have never
been leviabie without State authority.
NOT can right Of way through private
lands, or across navigable stream, or
public ground or highway. be obtained
except through Intervention of State
power. A railroad and It's rolling stock.
and the railroad corporation itself, are
declared to be mot for the railroad
company's own use privately and prin-
cipally, bat for public rss. The public
and not the railroad company, the mas
ter and not the servant, the creator and
not the creature, determines that use."
This ID not merely sound Law, bat Il Is
an expression of judicial opinion that
at ouoe meets cordial response in the
judanent OF thoughtful and patriotic
eitiasns. The doctrine that subject
cannot be greater than the State. that
creature Of Law cannot hold and exer-
else greater powers than a creator Of
Law, In one that cannot be too firmly
impressed upon the public mind.
There are" says Judge Greene, "some
acts that Congress cannot do. IL can
not wholly divest itself of its constitu-
tional preroeatives and powers. II
cannot take any fraction Of any OF ito
constitutional powers and lodge the
same beyond its control elsewhere.
In this view an unqualified right TO fix
tolls. granted TO q railroad company.
becomes in fact right, qualified by
fairness and reason--a qaantua ms,-sis
right-nothing greater. The Northern
Pacific has no right 10 hx unreasonable
tolls, because its charter does no, quail
ify or limit the authority given IFS
directors in this matter.
The argument of the court upon the
powers and duties Of State, and the
doctrine of vested rights Hereunder.
is thorough, compact and convincing.
From II we take this extract. Taking
the position that corporation il a
subject. aud agreeing With all authorl-