Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1886-03-16
IgpoRTANT DECISION,
onluicn Of the Supreme Court
w ~ 81 NJ. E. & 5. W. Miller vs..
~ sante Fe Railway Co.
,,,,nn. Of tho Bell County Sub
~ s,,,, Decided IN Favor % the
c,nseus OF Hen County.

p.sasrs Of ckzETrl. wiH nnd below
,ii es'esrtsry ard fuller account OF The I
~ tA..i sShaidv suit against Gulf, Colora 4
y tlun.sv ~ raiir0sd. decided lest Saturday I
n...',r,,, courl in favor Of the citizens % 4
Ilt An cN1lanatoiy Geographic &C
i ns.,sse suit ard the imncttance OF this (
|Giiyl w. nuhllshed IN sundays GAZETTE. 4
sfff W. n,,d, IA regarded OF such Importance
is1.,,rI-rrl takes pleasure In giving iis {
|l.iha., ~, teXt 81 the opinion nearly IN full 1
N..sndsnce Of the 1azette.
|,sig p.esroN. TEX, March Is The /
"a ", snnreue court consisting Of Jus
e,.v,on Of the regular supreme
~ ssd Hon. W. S. Dolsney Of Co.
"a. and 4. NJ. Harwood Of Gonzales,
,',sd decision to-day In case Of NJ.
Eta w. Miller, appellants, vs.. Gulf,
4 .,So 4 Santa Fe Railroad Company
Ealyeston county, reversing aud
.,sng Judgment for appellants, opin-
X. Inaaes Harwood and Delaney.
A ". decision Is of special interest to
y. sione line of Santa Fe road. Fol
az statement of facts will explain ma.
"a. was brought Dec. s, 1851, by
!. Il road upon two obligations or
N notes executed by NJ. Il. and S.
i VIer for the aggregate sum of $1,000.
n ssof these obligations for the sum of
~ vas executed June is, 1880, and
n o,her for 5000, on June 2G, 1850.
800 notes were executed by the Mill
MOS. who were citizens of Bolton,
osunty. Similar obligations to az
siSa sum of $4,000 were executed
s. ssirans Of Bolton, payable to Santa
,ompany at same time as stipulated
M Miller notes, hence to-day's decis-
III ,sects al the transactions.
N condition of Miller Bros. obliga-
!; Tss such that If the Santa Pc road
,ot completed to the town Of Bolton
.Xeeig day Of March, 1881, thenlthe
allop 10 be null and void About
n ame time large number of citizens
( /|niton, including Miller Bros, delly-
\ tothe Santa Fe bond for $1,000,
Mloped that they would furnish the
y ,sny oil necessary conveyances for
II way through Bell county and
a ol Bolton on any route that touched
i b orporate limits of Bolton.
itr Bros, in their answer before the
Mic court, plead
n That the notes were given upon a
Hnsc and consideration contrary to
apubllc policy.
n That the railway was not completed
kNton by March /, 1881.
n That the execution of the notes was
aed through the promise of the com-
&yh build its railway upon a desig-
&Atoute into the town of Bolton, and
tuie rs depot at a point within half
HE Of the courthouse therein;
" he town and citizens were
= Il aud willing to donate
lM fght Of way and necessary
y giounds whenever needed; that the
aryin disregard Of its promise and
requirements of the law under which
VHNbullt, changed its course so as to
rvund the town and established its
outslde the corporate limits and
" than mile from the courthouse.
--- Inst the notes were also signed in
hBh IN the representations OF the
ANY that Bolton should remain the
mus for two years, and that no rival
sould be built near (which rep
sailOus had been published by the
lny.
Hply 10 this answer the Santa Fe BY
06 mental petition excepted specially
4 iAst part of the answer after the
"a NJ denial. The company denieC
I! sscty OF Belton was ready OF abb,
Aa such right of way and depo
ils The company also alleged tina
Z y Fla have run its road into the city o
and would have built its depo
w ahall Gmile OF the courthouse haC
~ n dway and depot grounds been fur
~ ias per contract by the citizens ans
sNsStill ready TO do so upon SAM
eA -0Hs
-.,--- ihlseyidence the case was sub
70 the district court without
4 MtAe Santa Fe company recovere'
nsht Tor the amount of its obliga
~ n WIN Interest. Miller Bros. appeale
case was submitted TO the specia
Ieourt on the record, with briefs
Aprlnted arguments by both pan
1 lne charter Of the company was i
INN s before the court, the eighth SCI
INV le charter designates the pre-
IIhA loule Of the road, and among othe
lllllM eesmsted through which it sha
asne town Of Bolton, In Bell county
uplniop of the special suprem
overs fourteen closely write
Inc court opens with the state
As Att II concurs with the distriC
.--<- @fegarding the company's charte
-yrT ol us obligations Hereunder q
lNfj1 INTO and forming part OF tn
su' made with appellants
"a Mronslruing the obligations sue
IS The facts end circumstance
aing the parties, going to thro'
npy bajN = . 70 what We're the objects an
Y Of the contracting parties
sconsldered.n
Hkwlng the facts substantially q
Toci stated, the court touching upo
- 10 the agreement stipulatin
". na Fe would locate and e.
- Y qepot within half mile of tn
XIV, says "This was the fair an
BATE sa.le construction 10 be put.upo
YMuons made by Mr.. Sealy {
AAe This amount was subscribe
- ased by Sppellants.n Con-
W. extract from public speec
.k wv Mr.. Sealy at Bolton on tn
nh1ns ssSstriptlon was made, whegei
|,lINlIDH says ''We desire that yo
vi'r n lsvoete for US the right-of-wa
~ lines through YOUR town an
~sepg enabling US TO choose Il
Nacable route. Then we sha
~ to procure the necessal
yoar eity for depot purpose
....,.-> !; n, ssoogh not least, we ask you
200, which IS bat q portion
sost 70 run our road into TOW
-xfl s-,9A then recites the history
IA Sqs and states that prior
IkNH 1850, the date OF Mr.. Sealy
t oaa had surveyed two linz
isen terminus 10 and into Il
limits Of Belton; shat in tn
~. .aly Of same year It surveyed
~ the Birdsdale route INTO Il
-. ss ~. Of the town to a point N
,errII " courthouse square. {
I q this third survey Walt