The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-09-17

scattered through the big, chilly and half
lighted room, in and out side the rail.
This was the meager audience before
which the argument in the highest court
OF one of the most important cases that
has ever been tried in California was begun.
Mrs. Stanford, contrary to expectation, was
not there.
Judge Hawley called the case immedi-
ately and Judge McKisick rose with
large book of about 200 pages in his hand,
saying that he had prepared and printed
his argument which he would proceed to
read to the court.
How long will you require for your
argument?" inquired Justice Gilbert.
This is a case involving very impor-
tant principle and very large sum of
money" SAID Judge McKisick, land
would respectfully ask the court not to
place any limitations on it as to time.
really cannot say how long L shall require
to present my case"
The court assented and Judge McKisick
began the relation of the story OF. the case;
how on the 18th of March the United
States filed a bill in the court below to
establish a claim for $15, ,237,0 900 against
the estate of Leland Stanford as stock
holder of the Central Pacific Railroad
Company being individually liable as such
! stockholder for the indebtedness of the
company to the Government.
The respondent filed one general and
five special demurrers to the whole bill.
The Circuit Court sustained the general
demurrer without giving any considera-
tion to the others. The complainant de-
oil ,1I -, h.
decree dismissing the bill.
Counsel for respondent made an elab-
crate argument in support of his conten-
ton that there was was no personal obliga-
ton on the part of the corporations to pay
the debt for the reason that the grants were
upon condition.
1.-The court below decided the point
against him. He next contended that if
mistaken as to his first point. the stock
holders of the Central Pacific Railroad
Company of California were not liable, for
the reason that the corporation, in build
ing its road east of the State line of Cali
fornia, proceeded ultra wires, and conse-
quently the stockholders were not liable
The court did not decide the point. But
if there is anything in the point, it could
not have sustained the demurrer, as the
Western Pacific lies entirely within the
State, and the demurrer, going to the
whole bill, is too broad, and must, for that
reason alone, be overruled."
With regard to the statute of limitations,
which the other side had urged in its argu-
ment, Judge McKisick said the court
below did not consider the point.
He next recited the assignments of error
aH hn ha1n On
peal,' he said, the whole case is open in
this court, just as it was in the Circuit
Court. There are no presumptions in
favor of the decree. The case must be
argued here de novo. Ii the complainants
are entitled to any relief on the facts al
legged III the bill and admitted by the de-
murrer, the decree must be reversed; if
they are entitled to no relief the decree
may be affirmed without regard to the
reasons assigned by the Circuit Judge in
support of his decision.''
The :. theory of the Circuit judge was
then presented at length and authorities
quoted on the technical question as to the
potency of the demurrers, and then the
main contention entered upon whether
or not the complainants were entitled to
any relief under the constitution and laws
of the State of California upon the facts
alleged in the bill"
"It is to be noticed, he said, 'that in
section 80 of the constitution dues from
corporations shall be secured by such in
dividual liability of the corporators as
may be prescribed by law. Not word
about stockholders in that section; while
section Sc the constitution declares in
positive and emphatic terms that each
stockholder shall be individually and per-
sonally liable for his proportion.
when l come to discuss the case of
French VS.. Teschemaker, referred to in the
ninth assignment, the reason for the