Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1888-05-02

tions of California, and 1t is of these that
the teachers will seek out object lessons.
Besides, the. great mass of the educators
will visit the chief valley and foothill sec
tons of the State, and very many will
remain here some time, spying out the
land at their leisure. It is incumbent,
therefore, upon all the interior to give the
Executive Committee the material support
asked for, and we have no doubt whatever
but that it will be afforded.
THE END CT AN OUTRAGEOUS SUIT.
OF all the suits at law ever brought in
this State professedly in the interest of
the people, there never has been one so
utterly devoid of reason and underlaid by
60 much of mean demagogy as that Just de-
cided by the Supreme Court of California
in favor of the Central Pacific Railroad
Company and against the State When
the action was brought the RECORD UNION
exposed Its true character, as it had the
previous attempts to force the matter into
prominence. Long prior to that the
threat of suit was used in manner to
justify the belief that it was an attempted
outrage, the officers of administration
after administration having been be-
sieged to allow the name of the State to be
used for the purpose of such suit, and
Legislatures besought to intervene in
the matter. 1t was Attorney General
Hart who, being approached by an
interested party concerning it with an
offer intimating possibility of private gain,
Indignantly drove the offender from his
Office
The State in 1864 contracted with the
railroad company to convey its messengers
and certain other persons, and to transport
goods to and from the State Fair, without
compensation, and also to deed to the
State when patented certain granite quar-
ries. For all this the State was to pay
interest on certain bonds. The company
performed all the obligations imposed upon
1t by the contract, and good deal more,
and the State paid the interest up to about
the last payment, when officials of the
State were induced to engage in the
attempt to recover from the company the
interest paid, on the ground that the rail-
road corporation had not performed its
part Of the agreement. The chief point
made was that the company had refused to
apply for patent to the land on which
the granite quarry is located, and had re-
fused to make the deed called for by the
agreement. 1t was also alleged that the
company had refused transportation to the
messengers of the State and to carry per-
sons and goods for the State as required by
the contract
Now, all there was in either of these
charges can be put into a nut shell.
First, that possibly some parties claiming
to be State messengers or entitled to free
transportation under the contract had been
refused by conductors because they
did not present the necessary evil
denee of their official character
and even these cases, if any had
arisen, were very few. Of course it does
not call for legal ability to determine
such an issue-the State messenger must
show himself to be such, otherwise any
one choosing to claim the right to travel
free could secure it by mere verbal asser-
ton OF the claim. The quarry land could
not be decided to the State until patented
to the company. The company had for
years pertinaciously pressed its claim for
patent, but it was contested in part bv
other claimants and the Government
failed to settle the contest and issue the
patent. 1t will bereadily seen that it would
be greatly to the interest of any one claim
ing the land as against the company, to
force the latter to buy out the contestants
In order to secure patent, and that the
threat of a suit in the name of the State
would be powerful motor to that end.
In fact, however, the railroad company did
secure patent to so much of the land as
was uncontested, and promptly decided the
same to the State.
On the trial of the action which was for
Judgment for S1,9425O0 and interest.
against the railroad company, demurrer
was interposed for uncertainty, and was
sustained. The State refused to avail of
the privilege to amend, preferring to go to
the Supreme Court on the demurrer, and
final Judgment was accordingly entered.
The claim in behalf of the State was that
the railroad company had the option to
perform the terms of the contract or to
repay the interest paid by the State on the
bonds. The Supreme Court holds ad
versely to the view, declares that the con-
tract was an absolute one, and in nowise
that if the State had been
wronged by the company, it should
have sued to recover damages, the
measure being at least, as speci-
fed by the contract, the sum
of the interest paid by the State. The
suit was not one for damages, and if it had
been, the complaint was so ambiguous and
uncertain, say the Court, that recovery
could not have been had upon it; for it
referred only in a general manner to the
. refusal of the company to comply with
the terms of the agreement without emu
merating any instances of violation. The
Judgment of the Court below was therefore
affirmed, and thus long enduring matter of |
injustice and attempted outrage comes to |
an end. If the State had any case what
ever against the railroad company if it
had been injured by it in any respect re-
lating to the contract, it would have been