The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1886-03-02
THE SUPREME COURT.
A NUMBER OF IMPORTANT DE.
CISIONs.
The Memphis and Little ROck Rail-
road W.. the southern Ex-
press Company.


WASHINGTON, March 1.-Among the
decisions by the Supreme Court to-
day were the following:
No. %. The Memphis and Little
Rock Railroad Conn any, appellant,
vs.. the Southern Express Company.
Appeal from the Circuit Court Of the
United States for the Eastern ID strict
of Arkansas. No.'26. The st. Louis,
Iron Mountain and Southern Railroad
Company, appellant, VS.. the Southern
Express Company. Appeal from the
Circuit Court for the Eastern District
of Missouri. No. SO. The Missouri,
X infas and Texas Railrc nd Company,
appellant, VS.. William b. Dinsmore,
81 President of the Adams Express
O mpany and as q shareholder therein,
these suits present substantially the
Slme questions. They we're each
brought by an express company
against the railway company to re-
strain the railway company from in
terfering with or disturbing in any
manner the facilities heretofore af-
forded the express company for doing
its business on the railway Of the rail-
way company. The question pre-
ceEtsd was the right OF railroad com.
panies to refuse to carry express mat
ter and the agents and messengers OF
the express companies over their
lines. The railroad companies
claimed the right to trans
port express matter over their
lines in cars selected by themselves
and under the control OF their own
employees. The lower court decided
in favor OF the express company. The
Chief Justice delivered the opinion OF
the court. He held that 1t was not
shown in the testimony that any rail-
road company has ever held itself out
as common carrier of common car
risrs. The question, he said, was
whether these express companies can
row demand as a right what they have
heretofore had only as favor.
That depends on whether the
railroad companies are by law
charged with the duty Of carrying
all express companies in the way that
express carriers are usually carried
Just as they are with the duty of car
rying all passengers and freight', when
offered in the way that they are car
red, The court holds that they are
not. The decree is reversed and the
suit is remanded, with directions to dis
solve the Injunction, and after adjust
ing the question between the parties
for business done while the Injunction
was in force, and decreeing the ray
ment OF any amounts that may be
found to be due to dismiss the billie.
Justice Matthews took no part in the
decision OF these cases. Justices Mil
Ter and Field dissented from the
opinion.
No. 100. The Pho ak Insurance
Company Of Brooklyn, appellant, vs..
the Erie and Western transportation
Company. Appeal from the Circuit
Court of the United States for the
Eastern District of Wisconsin. This
was libel in admiralty. The cargo
Of corn was shipped from Chi
cago to Buffalo on propeller
belonging 10 the Transportation Com
pany and was lost in transit. II was
insured in the Phoenix Company, who
paid the owners $4,000, the amount OF
the policy, and then sued the Trans
pohation Company for damages. The
defense claimed that by provision of
the contract for carriage the carrier was
TO have the benefit OF any insur-
ance effected by the owners upon the
goods. The District Court held that
this provision was valid, and therefore
no right of superogation accrued to
the libellant, and entered decree &C.
coEdingly. The libellaut appealed to
the Circuit Court, and that court
awarded the libellant the sum OF
$2466 IL. The decree Of the Circuit
Court is affirmed.
No. 1856. The State OF Tennessee,
plaintiff in error, vs.. George X. Whit.
worth, trustee OF Davidson county,
Tenn. In error to the Circuit Court |
of the United States for the Middle
District Of Tennessee. This suit was
brought by the State OF Tennessee
against the tax-collector CT a county
to require him to assess for taxa
LlOn tu6 nuhIcb VI bJOCA Ia
the Nashville, Chattanooga and
st. Louis railroad. Under the chatter
Of the company, it's capital stock was
forever exempted from taxation, and
it's roads, workshops, etc., were ex-
empted from taxation for twenty years
rom the completion OF the road. The
Circuit Court was OF the opinion that
The shares OF stock were by the charter
exempt from taxation, and gave judg.
nent accordingly. The judgment is
affirmed.
No. 934. Same parties and the came
question is whether the Nashville aud
Der atur Railroad Company has the
'ame charter contract for the exemp-
ion OF its capital stock from taxation
IS the Nashville and Chattanooga.
Judgment affirmed in both cases, hold
ng that taxation OF both the road and
,apital stock would be double taxation.
No. 121. The Vicksburg, Shreve-
port and Pacific Railroad Company,
plaintiff in error, vs. Elias s. Dennis.
This sui was brought to recover tax
assessed under the general laws OF the
state. The Supreme Court affirmed
he judgment of the lower court
which declared the tax illegal.