Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1896-03-04
MRS. STANFORD WINS.
A Decision by the Supreme Court In
a Case Involving Mill
ions

Washington, D. c.. March 2.-The Su-
preme court today decided the Stanford
case in favor of Mrs. Stanford.
The title of this case is the United
States VS.. Jane L. Stanford, executrix
of Leland Stanford. deceased. 1t in
wolves the individual liability of stock
holders in the Central Pacific Railroad
company for the debt due to the Unite,
States on the bonds issued in aid of Il
Central Pacific under the California CO
StitutiOn.
Mr.. Stanford held 144,3S7 shares {
the Central Pacific stock and it was
claimed by the government in instituting
its case that the government was Ell
titled to collect SO, 237, 900 from the
Stanford estate. This contention was re-
sisted by Mrs. Stanford on the ground
that the California constitution was not
self-executing and also on the plea that
it was the intention of Congress in
granting aid to the Central Pacific com
pany to put it on footing different from
the footing on which other government
aided roads were placed.
The case was brought originally in the
circuit court for the District of Califor-
mia, where the decision was favorable to
Mrs. Stanford, and was then appealed
to the circuit court of appeals for the
ninth circuit where the decision was also
against the government. The govern
ment appealed to the United States SUI
preme court and soon after the case was
dOcketed moved to have it advanced
for hearing. This motion being granted,
the argument was made during January,
eminent counsel appearing on both sides.
The suit had attracted great attention
from it's initiation because of the effect
the decision will have on the other Cen
trail Pacific stockholders and also be-
cause the fortunes of the Stanford uni
versity will be determined largely by the
decision.
Justice Harlan delivered the opinion
in the Stanford case. He held that indi-
'vidtal~ stockholders were not liable for
the government debt of the Central Pa
cifc Railroad company. He said the
congressional acts of 1S62-4-5 regarding
the Pacific railroad must all be regarded
as one law, as the object was the con-
struction of one continuous line. Con
gress employing the different railroad
companies only as Instruments. Securi-
ty was given in the government mort
gage on the property of the railroad com
panies. 1t was, he said, not too much
to say that if in the building of the
Northern Pacific, for instance, the stock
holders had been made liable, the pur-
pose OF Congress to secure national
highway would have been materially. re-
tarded, and it was plain that no obliga-
ton was meant to be put on one com
pany that was not put on the other. ANY
other construction would be inconsistent
The decision of the court below was
therefore affirmed
In the United States Supreme court to-
day Justice White announced the decis-
ION OF the court in the Elmira Savings
bank case. This case was brought to
the Supreme court on writ of error
from the New York state court of ap-
peals by Charles Davis, receiver of the
Elmira National bank. The question in
volved was whether the deposits of a
savings bank in a failed national bank
could be given preference over other de
posits. The lower court decided against
the state law giving preference to saw
ings bank deposits, and put them on the
same footing as other deposits. Decision
reversed