St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-01-05
IN FAVOR OF THE Mp.
The Yakima Case Raises a Judi
ciaI Difference.


WASHINGTON. Jan. A decision
was rendere d by the supreme court to-
day in favor of the Northern Pacific
Railway company, in a mandamus suit
brought against it by the territory of
Washington, eX rel Hiram Dustin, pros
ecuting attorney of Yakima county. to
compel the railway company to main
tain a station and stop its trains at
Yakima City, the company having built
town of its own at North Yakima and
refusing to stop trains at Yakima City.
Justice Gray rendered the opinion of
the court. Justices Brewer, Field and
Harlan dissented. The bill sets forth
that Yakima City, at the time Of the
building of the road, was the coun ty
seat and largest town in that county.
and that the object Of the railroad in re-
fuSIng 10 make Yakima CITY a railroad
station was to ruin the town and en-
nance the value of the town site of
North Yakima. which it had located on
unimproved lands belonging to the
railroad company.
Justice Gray, in the opinion of the
court, says that writ of mandamus to
compel railroad corporation to do
particular act in constructing it's road or
buildings, or in running its trains, can
legal duty on its part to do that act. and
clear proof of a breach of duty. The
| courts have so held, even in the matter
of establishing station at the terminus
OF a road. The difficulties in the way
of Issuing mandamuS are much IN
creased when it is sought to compel
| road to stop trains at a particular place.
The location of stations and ware
houses for receiving and delivering pas
sengers and freight involves a compre-
henSiYe view of the interest of the pub
lie. as well as of the corporation, and
consideration Of many circumstances
concerning the amount of business and
convenience of particular locations.
which are more appropriate to be deter
mined by the directors of the company
or, in case Of abuse of their discretion.
by the legislature or by administrative
boards entrusted by the legislature with
that duty, than by the ordinary judicial
tribunals.
Justice Gray says that the charter of
the company does not impose any spe-
cific duty as to size of stations, and that
to compel the directors to be controlled
by the courts by writS Of mandamus in
establishing stations would be incon-
sistent with many previous decisions.
The findings below, he says, show that
the people living in the surrounding
country considered as a community
would be better accommodated at va
kima than at Yakima City. The COM
pany denies the fraudulent intent
charged by Yakima City. and it was not
found by the jury. The fact that the
town of North Yakima was laid out by
the company on its own land cannot inn
pair the rights of the inhabitants of that
town.
Justice Brewer rendered a vigorous
oral dissent, which was conquered in by
Justices Harlan and Field. he said
that when the railroad built its line it
found a city already established, the
county seat and largest placs along its
road for many miles. Every public in
terest required that the station should
be established there. Instead the rail
road company went three or four miles
further along and laid out town on its
own land. No reason is given for such