The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1897-01-04
JUDGE MYERS DECISION.

The following is an editorial in the
Chicago Evening Post on the recent
decision of Judge Myers in the Santa
Fe receivership:
There was no little apprehension in
railroad and business circles in connec-
ton with the Kansas attempt to apply
the anti-alien land law to railroads
After the federal court had declined to
intervene and held that it was without
Jurisdiction in the case, it was greatly
feared that Populism would influence
the state courts and lead to a decision
unfaVorable to the Santa F'e railroad
which Judge Myers had placed in the
hands of q receiver in an extraordinary
proceeding. OF course an effort would
have followed to have the entire law
set aside as unconstitutional, but the
complexion of the Kansas judiciary
would make the issue more than doubt
full.
It is fortunate for the Santa Fe, and
still more fortunate for Kansas, that
Judge Myers has pleasantly disap-
pointed his critics by taking a broad
and enlightened view of the litigation
and ruling that the anti-alien land law
was not intended to apply to railroads.
His reasoning is logical and cogent,and
the decision comedies with precedent as
we'll as with common sense
The law refers to real estate" and
Judge Myers finds that the courts have
invariably held that these terms can
not be taken to mean the railroad or
right of way of a railroad company or
any other property necessary for use
in the performance of its chartered OBJ
legations. Besides under the Kansas
law, forfeited real estate has to be sold
in parcels under execution, and Judge
Myers declares that this provision can
not apply to railroad land. Purchasers
of railroad property would not succeed
to the franchises, and the power of the
corporation to perform it's duties to the
public would be destroyed. The judge
continues:
fait ~
affixing penalties must be strictly con-
strued. 1t is elementary that the pro-
visions of such a statute as chapter 3
cannot be broadened or extended. If a
person or a corporation is to be de-
prived of property for the violation of a
statute the very words of the statute
must be literally observed. Within all
the authorities the power TO forfeit
land or affix penalties cannot and ought
not to be enlarged by judicial interpre
tation. 1t should go without saying
that it is the cardinal canon of con-
structiOn that the intent, when aScer-
tanned, governs. and that all mere rules
of Interpretation are subordinate.
Considering all the provisions of the
statute IN question IN view OF the Well
known mischief intended to be RENE
died thereby, and especially in view
of the express terms of the statute
providing how real estate forfeited
Hereunder must be divided into parcels
and sold, I am forced to conclude that
the term real estate employed is not
intended to, and does not, embrace a
railroad or any essential part thereof -
In other words the application on
technical ground and under a loose
construction of the law in question
to railroads would yield no ap-
parent benefit to the public, while
it would certainly involve seri-
Gus Inconvenience and hardship in
many directions. In view of the repu-
tation of Kansas and its judiciary in
the matter of treatment of capital and
enterprise, even small favors will be
most thankfully received by those not
affected by POpulisnn. In some quarters
the most ordinary manifestation of
healthy sense is a. cause for congratu-
lation and rejoicing,