New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-05-06
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
AN IMPORTANT RAILROAD CASE.
A LINK IN THE GOULD SYSTEM NvoLvED-pArEs

|
of Missouri appellant against the Missouri Pacific Rail-
way Company O. X Garrison, Jay Gould and others.
Appeal from the Circuit Court OF the United States fog
the Eastern District of Missouri This suit arises out OF
the alleged fraudulent foreclosure in 1870 ofa mortgage
on the Pacific Railroad OF Missouri tho sale that road
under decree OF foreclosure and Its Reorganization
hands OF Garrison, Gould and others, under tho title Of
the Missouri Pacific Railway Company The suit there
FORE virtually brought by the former holders OF thu
rairond property against the present holders OF &C.
recover legal title TO 1t, on the ground
that they were deprived OF It by gross
fraud. 10 alleged by the appellants
in the court below that the default in the payment OF the
interest its bonds which made the preext for tho
foreclosure and sale OF its road rauduenty
and procured by means Of dishonest collision between
its unathfu board OF directors and the present appeees
and that therefore, II is entitled TO have the decree OF
foreclosure and sale set aside and its property restored
it, The appellees demurred in the court Below upon
various grounds which this court In elaborate opinion
by Justice Blachford, declares DO insufficient This
court holds:
O. That the charges OF fraud in the bill were sufficient
TO warrant the discovery and relief based on those
charges. Oh That the set forth in the bin
showing that real defence made In the foreclosure
suit Of 1876, because Of the unathfu conduct Of the
solicitor and directors OF the defendant in
that sut and it was, therefore, case
Of which court Of equity would take cognzance QI)
That there aches in filing the bill the time dur
ing which the appeal TO the court pending could nos
be counted against the plaintiff QY.) That the bin
showed hostile control Of the corporate affairs OF the
plaintiff by directors during period covered by the
foreclosure suit knowledge by or notice 10 tbs
plaintiff Orlts directors, officers stockholders, Of tho
facts alleged IN the bin, during that period was unm-
poTtan Of acqlescence assent or ratification nos
having been shown, and the corporation haylag acted
promptly when freed from the control OF such drectos
w. That did not, however, follow that parties who
became interested in the plaintiff corporation with
knowledge OF the matters set forth in the
bill entitled to the same standing
10 relief with those who inter-
ested in the corporation when the transactions COM
planned OF occurred (vL) That the Circuit Court hal
jurisdiction Of the BILL notwithstanding the fact that the
plaintiff and some OF the defendants were citizens Of Mis-
souri, Tue decree Of the Circuit Court f. therefore
versed and the remanded with directions to override
the demurrers with and take further proceedings
not inconsistent with this courts opinion.
The railroad property in controversy in this
bought in at the foreclosure sale In 1876 by James Baker
for G. K. Garrison Russell Sage and Others and
trolling Interest IN it aferwad sold by the latter TO
Jay Gould, and 1t has since that time formed mpOr
tant link in the Gould system. The present 10
this on legal technicaltyin 1880 and decided
against the plaintiffs original OF the road. The
decision rendered to-day will enable the plaintiff to bring
the here upon its merits and got final decision OF
this upon the charges OF faithfuness and fraud
which, 1t Is alleged, the means by which tho road
wrecked.
decision was also rendered by the court to-day in tho
patent OF the Eagleon Manufacturing Company ap
pcant against the West Bradley and Cary Manufacur-
ing Company and Joseph West Appeal from the Circus
Court Of the United States for the Southern District Of
New-York This suit for alleged infringement Of
patent upon Improvement in japanned furniture
springs granted to the appellant in 1871 The holds
that the patent is invalid and alrms the decree OF ths
court below. Opinion by Justice Blarchford.
decision was also rendered in the patent case o. J.
Howard Philips, Ct al. eXecuorsa appellants, against the
City Of Detroit Appeal from the Circuit Court Of tue
United States for the Eastern District OF Michigan. This
suit brought By tie appellants against tho city for
alleged infringemen Of aPatont granted to one PHIL
lips, December 1871, upon Improvement in wooden
payements The court below dismissed tho bill on the
ground that in view Of the OF the art at that time
the patent did not describe any patentable invention
This court susains that decision and alms the decree.
opinion by Justice Woods
decision also rendered by the court to-day in hs
case oithe Slaughter House 1--we stock
Landing Company, appellant, against the Crescent city
Live stock Landing and Slaughter House Company
Appeal from the Circuit Court OF the United States for
the Eastern District Of louisiana The question pre-
scented by the is whether tho State OF louisiana by
the provisions Of the Constitution adopted IN 1870
mad the power to tako away the exclusive privileges
granted to the Crescent City Slaughter House Company
By act OF the General Assembly OF IOuis aopfed
May =, 1879. This court holds o. That the regulation
OF certain unw9oiesome or dangerous trades, such
"a the slaughter-hOuse business, the mdnuiac-
lnre OF gunPowder, etcy which may become
WHAT may be called the police powers OF the Stately
That the legislature cannot BY any contract limit the
exercise OF these police powers to the prejudice nj be
general welfare Tne pTescryation OF me nno NJ lii
and the protection OF public morals necessary tot the
pest interests OF the social organization, that wise pol
Icy fOrbds the Satiye body to divest itself OF the
power to enact laws for the preservation OF health and
repression OF crme such power cannot be sold or bar
gained away under any circumstances as Tit wcrc merely
apryiiege wbio the legislator could dispose of al h,
that the state of louisiana had ana could properly excr
else the lower to revoke the exclusive privileges granted
to heappeees In this case. and that the state c0nstu
ton OF 1879 aud the ordinances Of the city Of NewOr-
leans complained or are NOT void as mparng the Obga-
toh OF he appeeeS contract Inc decree OF the Crcmo
Court Is reversed aud tho case renanded with directions
to dismiss the bill Opinion by Justice Miller
Among the decisions to-day were the following: No
3ll-John p Thompson and others, administrator etc.,
IN error ~ the circuit Court or United states for tho
Northern District OF OHIO Judgment reversed with costs
dict amt order new trial Opinion by Nh Justice Gray
Nc. 3i3-Le8aron Colt and others, appellants agt
Court Uuitod States for the District OF Connecticut De-
cree affirmed With costs. Opinion 0y MI. Justice Nat
M. J2o.-The Mobile and Montgomery Railway Com.
pdny paln IN error agt J. G. jury ct al, etc. INFERIOR
OF Alabama: Judgment affirmed with costs and interest
opinion by Mr. Justice Woods.
No. O5-Ihe Connecticut Mutual LifejInsurance Com
tfat5r etc In error To- the ctrcnit 1onr f b p
states tor the Western District of Missouri Judgment
amrned with costs and interest Opinion by Mr.. Justice
No. 252-Leon Hcnnequln ct a. etc, plaintiff I'm error
agt Henry Cews, e. al In error to the superior tOurg
of the Ct al NewIOrk. Judgment affirmed with costs
opinion by Mr. Justice Bradley.
No. 90-HhIlan s. Williams, et al. etc, appellants agt
Edwin ID. Morgan. IT, OF al etc. Appeal rom the Cir
cult Court OF the Uated states for the District OF Louis
lana; Decree modified and affirmed. Opinion by Mr..
Justice Bradley.
No. 3lOTne Factors and Traders Insurance plaintiff IN
error at. Widow Mary Murphy ct al. Appeal trom the
Supreme Court OF The state vi Louisiana Jud nent re-
yersed with costs and cause remande0 with Instructions
proceed therein in conformity with the opinion thu.
court. Opinion by Mr.. Justice Miller.
No. l269-Ihe 81 Paul and Minneapolis and Manitoba
Railway Company, appellant, AIT David Burton Arpe.i
from the Circuit Court OF the United states the deo
OF Minnesota Decree affirmed with costs. Opinion ~
Mr.. Chief Justice Waite
No. 9S2-Ihc NcW-Dre1ns and Mobile and Texas Rail-
road Company, plaintiff in error agt. State aiissssl
eX. rel district attorney
No. 12S2-H. Buttorworth, Commissioners plaiutfG IA,