The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1884-02-19
Demurrer Sustained I'm the Shoe
craft Case.

In the I. s Court at Jacksonville on
the 4th Judge Settle rendered the follow
ing decision in the case of NJ. J. Shoe
craft VS. The Trustees Of the Internal
Improvement Fund and the Railroad and
Land Companies of the State:
The foundation of thi> controversy is the contract
entered into the :;lst of May, 1871, between the
Trustees of the internal Improvement Fund OF
Florida and the Jacksonville Pensacola and Mobile
Railroad Company, Florida corporation II rs
conceded, of course, that the railroad company
could not sue the Trustees in this court
1t is contended, however, that the contract has
not been assigned to the complainant, Shoecrat, bul
that he is "A mortgage in trust of the lands men
toned in the contract, and that he being citizen
of the State of New York may sue in the Federal
courts.
think the reasoning giyen by the Supreme Court
of the United States, in the case of New York etc,
Co vs.. Memphis Water Co, lo1. l.. ). K, p 1G',
which is the latest adjudication on the subject are
applicable to this suit and that this court mas no
jurisdiction to hear and determine the question
raised by the assignee or MORTGAGE OF the d. r. q
W. Railroad Company against ne trustees Oh ' ne
Internal Improvement Fund OF Florida IL may De
stated here that the mortgage gwen 10 the con-
plainant Shoccraft by the }. T. n NJ, PROVIDED LOT
the issue ofbonds To ID" amoant OF S4"N" per mile
of its road not vet constructed made payable TO
Shoecrafl bearer, when the acts of 1869 ~ emit
lied =" Acts 10 perfect tn" public works OF the State,
only authorized this road to issue bonds to the
Florida
As the question of jurisdiction meets MS at the
threshold, and is AGAINST the right OF the complain
ant TO maintain This suit We might stop here, but
the court, out of respect for the very able and
learned coun>e on both sides OF this controversy,
who have well and forcibN presented their views,
feels called upon to briefly stale liz opinions on the
material points raised bv the pleadin%s.
do not think the bin is liable to the objection OF
being mutifArious.
1t concerns only one subject matter, and is
Joyous To The Games - Howe. Gl9 and Is so
clearly embraced in the very satisfactory reasoning
of that case that no other citation of authority is re-
CURED to remove that objection.
If il be conceded that the jacksonville Pensacola
and Mobile had the right under the statutes cited by
the learned counsel for the complainant, to pur-
chase and hold more land than necessary for the
general purposes Of its organization yet it does not
follow that tic Trustees of the Internal Improve
mcnt Fund had the right 10 make the contract set
forth in the compartments bill. They were Trus-
tees to hold and dispose of these lands under the
terms and conditions prescribed by the act of Con
grrss granting these lands to the State Of Florida,
and the acts of the Florida Legislature
These acts create several important trusts, some
Of them requiring the exercise of discretion and
these Trustees who public officers of the State,
charged with this execution They could not
delegate the execution Of such trusts to the j. r.
X Vi or 10 any other private corporation.
But it is said HAT the State, and the State only,
can be heard To complain Of these acts.
The contract i cNeCltOrN and il would seem that
any one whose rights may be affected by its eXelnr-
ton or performance should be heard to deny the
right of the Trustees 10 make it. But certainly a
court will not decree thc specific performance of a
contract. disposng of large trust fund, which the
Trustees had no RIGHT to enter into.
But even if they had possessed the right TO make
such contract, subsequent events have made it in
equitable to decree specific performance of il. If
the jacksonville Pensacola and Mobile Railroad has
a claim against the Trustees. for money paid, for
Indebtedness surrendered to them, they have adc-
quatc remedy a hand.
The consent decree as it is called, which was
made by judge Woods, on the 10th of December,
ISL VAS rcpudiatcd 10y the Trustees the 9TH of
March, 1872, and none of the matters and things
therein dccrccd To be performed by the Jackson.
Vile, Pensacola and Mobile have ever been per
formed. Indeed, the jacksonville, Pensacola and
VI 'hllc alleges that il Wa. not party to that de-
cree.
We deem il unnecessary To audc to the decree
or any OF it, provisions further than establish the
TACT that the Trustees on hc'th Of March, lSI2, put
the Jacksonville, Pensacola and Mobile at arm
length and gave them cause of action, if any could
arise Out Of the contract in question.
Notwithstanding that the Trustees Of the Jack
~Unyillc. Pensacola aud Mobile have been engaged
in lpn9 and tedious litigation for many years, We
heard nothing OF this contract until this bin was
cd on the Oh of October, lS$i, by Mathew j. Shoe
craft, the rainanl asking the court to decree
that the contract of May 81, ISL, is and always has
been a valid and suh,l>ing contract. that the said
contract be specifically performed" &c.
Why did not me Jacksonville, Pensacola and Mo-
bile set NJ thi- contract when it sued by the
Trustees 1t would have been as good defence
then a. it il now. Indeed, those suits proceeded
judgments ana DEGREES without the jacksonville
Pensacola and Mobile setting up This contract, which
il knew much al mt then as ii does now, may il
not l'c SAID IT, hc ttdj"tiic,bnt
How q or thut may he, We think the j., T. and VI
hl> been guilty of LiclcS III not asserting
whatever rights il might claim under the contract
Whatever rights the complainant may have are de-
rived from The mortgage made the Sd day OF Jan
uarN, lNs. 10 him 10y the j +. and ". He oc-
cupy 10 better ground than the company in RESPECT
To The doctriuc of lachrH.
The demurrer j. sustained and the bill is denied
IHuMA@ SETTLE, Judge
Hon. {. X. Davis and W. l-lsry represented the
com llaiiaut, and Colonel Chisholm, Hon John A.
Henderson and Attorn' General Rancy the de-
fence.
Upon hearing the decision the attorneys for the
complainant @aNr notice of appeal to the Su-
llrnr toHr Ui the lMtcd States