Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1892-11-14

In discussing the right Of the Baltimore and
Potomac road TO lay additional tracks on Mary
land avenue from 1871 street to the Long
bridge FOR which purpose the Commissioners
had granted a permit 20 the railroad company,
under an opinion from their legal adviser.
TEE STAR quoted from the opinion OF the
Supreme Court Of the lated States.
in which the cou-; decIat-d hat il could
see no place for the assertion OF any right in
the company 20 make other tracks or changes
in the location Of those now existing without an
act giving the consent Of Congress. That
opinion, delivered April 20, 1885, by Mr..
Justice Miller. is Of great interest because it
gives careful consideration to all the legal rights
OF the railroad company respecting tracks in
the District. The railroad company fled bill
IN equity TO restrain the District of Columbia
from interfering with the laying of its tracks in
certain streets in the city of Washington.
Judgment being rendered fo- the plaintiff. the
defendants appealed 20 the United States
supreme Court. Following is the text Of the
opinion Of the Supreme Court, which includes a
statement Of the facts:
OPINION or THE COURT.
This Is an appeal from the Supreme Court Of
the District OF Columbia. The railroad com
Tany has constructed its road from Baltimore
The city Of Washington to the Potomac river at
Long bridge. on which 1t crosses that river TO
ths Virginia eide. 10 has done this BY virtue of
several acts Of Congress granting the necessary
sa;hority to do 80. At the Washington end of
tNe bridge II has purchased and now owns one
81 the squares Of the city and part of another.
numbered. in the division Of the clty into
streets. squares and lots, squares 2S3 and 267.
These squares are divided by i5'h street run
riug north and south, and square 267. on its
oh s4ff rFH ryl and RyRtxa OrQ of
the streets OF the city. A: the junction Of Mary
had avenue. whose course il nearly east and
west. and 14;a street there is considerable
space of ground made BY Water street. which
follows the bank Of the river, and the other two
streets. which Il a public highway made by the
union Of sll three streets at that point.
The railroad company alleges that its in
creased traffic requires in the city OF Washing
Ton additional accommodations for receiving.
storing and transferring freight and that it has
purchased the two squares mentioned for that
reason and that q intends to build freight
depot on square 233. as being at once conven-
lent for the company and more out Of the way
q the travel. current business and residences
81 the citizens than any point within reason
able distance OF the line OF the road As their
road is NJ present located lawfully on Maryland
avenue. along which 1t touches the city end of
the bridge. this allegation is probably true.
In order. however. TO reach square 233 with
it. trains they must DEPART from Maryland ave-
the Of the pubic highway made BY tho
Junction OF Maryland avenue. Water street
snd i4th street. and. in so doing. depart from
MARYLAND avenue. The company gave notice,
As required By law 70 appellants, who. as Com
mis-iCners Of the District OF Columbia, are
charged With the care and protection Of the
streets and other highways of the city, that il
tnterCed TO construct lateral track. which,
leaving its main track on Maryland avenue at a
point near lie intersection with 18th street.
-
eide. and then crossing l{th street would reach
Its projected depot square 233. The Com
missioners refused consent to this, and fearing
10 would be attempted without such consen.
they guarded the way across the streetby police
force scr some time.
In rti- condition OF affairs the railroad COM
Iany filed Its bill In chsncery in the Supreme
Court OF the District Of Columbia, praying an
Injunction against the Commissioners to pre-
vent them from interfering with the exercise Of
it, track scfo-s l4,h street. aud that court
granted the injunction a. prayed.
QUESTIONS NOT CONSIDERED.
The appeal Of the Commissioners from this
decree brings the matter in issue before Us for
review. Neither the plesdings in the case nor
the relief sought by the bill. nor the decree Of
the court, bring into question the night Of the
company 10 purchase squares 233 and 267, nor
the night 20 erect on either of these warehouse
for ths storage of freight. Nor does the ques-
tioa arise II their right 10 locate at that place
such depot as their business requires. nor to
use IL a such n they have th-right OF access to
IL bv using the streets and highways Of the city
for that purpose. This court does not. there
fore. consider those questions. because the only
point raised by the record is the right Of the
COMPANY 10 law IN OF across the streets Of the
city their railroad track and use it az a means Of
transit for Its locomotiy es and cars without any
express authorization by act of Congress. or
the consent OF any authority representing the
city u Washington OF the District of Columbia
The assertion OF the existence of such a
right Il. 90 say the least. some hat novel II 10
no; Known to any member Of this court that
ANY railroad company. W neither its cars are pro-
PEELED by steam or horse power has ever
claimed the Use Of the streets OF an incorpora-
tel city CE snv part OF them without express
authority from some Legislative body or the
authorities % the city government. IL would
be n strange grant Of power which, authorizing
railroad COMPANY 20 enter or even pass
through q civ. should leave to the company
the selection not only % its route into or
through the city, but even the streets and high
ways over which It, tracks shoud be laid sub
isct only TO IL sense OF Its own convenience
sud that Of tho people of the city. Nor does
the desi-iou Of the court Of justice that the ne
C.--itIs- of the company demand The use of the,e
Streets aud that the locality u the depot to
which the tracb leads T. selected with due re-
ed to the interests Of the whole city make
thi- claim Of power any the less remarkable
N Judicial decision il cited in favor of such
opposition The streets Of Washington are
largely used b. street railway comp MES whose
t@eks occupy their surface. There are some
fuIr or i've " the-e companies aud their cars
a. propelled By horse power and not by steam
They are not only great convenience to the
citISen.. bat they have become almost q public
nsce--itv. But IL /. not believed that foot Of
al these tracks over all these streets exists
othsrei~e than by virtue Of an act Of Congress-
dir-ctiag specifically and infinitely where thi.
shall BE- done. And no power exists in one Of
thee Operations 70 lay q track, however
short. anywhere else. The railroad company
roe assertiug this right runs i;s cars from the
eAst side % the city to the west, n distance Of
too miles or more, through a densely popu-
Ltsd part u the city. over a track the location
OF every foot Of which Is prescribed with min
utene-- b. acts Of Congress. And its principle
Passenger depot located several hundred wards
from the main line OF Its road through the city
maksr 'hi- detection from that lire solely by
virtue 81 AL EN- Tes- act Of Congress passed 40
enable the company 10 do So"
TIE CANE or coSoREss
IL - sith these wel-knoWn facts before M
showing the care With which Congress has re-
pestedly exercised the power Of granting. re-
fo-ing and regulating the use OF the street, of
Washington for railroads, that we approach tho
examination of the statute OF statutes which
trssappO-ed 20 grant the enIarged power claimed
bv the BALTIMORE aud Potomac companx in ,h;.