The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-05-24
NO EXCLUSIVE RIGHT
STREET-RAILWAY CASE DECIDED
BY FEDERAL SUPREME COURT.
Detroit Franchise Rendered Void
Justice Brewers Definition of
the Word "ThrOugh."

States Supreme Court in the case of the De-
troit Citizens Street-railway Company VS..
the Detroit Railway and the City of De-
troit which has been pending in the court
for some time, affirmed the decision of the
State court adverse to the former company.
The case was appealed from the decision
of the Supreme Court of the State of Mich
igan, and involved the right of the Detroit
City Council to grant an exclusive frau
chise to lay street-car tracks in that city.
In 1862 an ordinance was passed giving to
the Detroit City Railway Company, of
which the Detroit Citizens. Company is the
successor, the right to lay railways in
streets voted by the council to the exclu-
sion of all other companies. In 1879 this
right was extended for thirty years. In
1894 the council passed an. ordinance giving
the Detroit railway the right to lay tracks
on the same streets already occupied by the
lines of the other company. The old COM
pany then brought suit to restrain the new
organization, on the ground that this or
dinance impaired the validity of its contract
with the city. The decision rendered to-
day was handed down by Justice McKenna
and was adverse to the claim of exclusive
right, sustaining the decision of the Michi-
gan court. arnl o*ts* s$IonIfsz stH
of the United States Supreme Court to-day
in the case of the Provident Life and Trust
Company, of Philadelphia, VS.. The County Of
Mercer, in the State of Kentucky, appealed
from the United States Circuit Court of APP
peals for the Sixth Circuit. The case in
volved the validity of certain bonds issued
by the county in aid of the Louisville
Southern Railway. Company. After paying
interest on the bonds for three and half
years the county repudiatfd them on the
ground that the road had not complied with
the terms of the law under which the au-
thority WIS granted to the county TO issue
the bonds. The case turned upon the queS,
ton of the meaning of the word through.
While the road was built into the county 1t
failed to cross it to the extent of two miles
A clause in the law provided that the on Oh,
cations should not be considered valid un,
til 1.-The road shall have been completed
through the county" In rendering his opln-
ion Justice Brewer held that the word as
here used did not necessarily mean that the
road should traverse theCcounty from end
to end and he gave several illustrations
to show that it did not always convey TINS
meaning, among others the hrSt sentence
from Bunyan's Pilgrims progress: pegln-
ming las l walked through the wilderness WIG rIls
of this world The justice held that Bun
yam could not have meant to be understood
as saying that ''He passed from one END or
the wilderness to the other; reasoning
upon these lines, he reached the CONCLUSION
that the road had earned the bonds and
therefore affirmed the opinion OF the Circuit
Court of Appeals.
The Supreme Court. in two instances to-
day. decided the question of the right of the
owners of a mineral vein to follow the vein
outside the territory covered by the surface
area of location, the opinion being by JUS
tice Brewer. The first of these cases was
that of the Del Monte Mining Company
vs. the Last Chance Mining Company, the
property involved being, located in the
Sunnyside district. in Mineral county. Col
orado. The decision, was not upon the
merits of the case, but was in response to
the questions certified to the court by the
United States Circuit Court of Appeals of
the Eighth circuit, where the case is now
pending. There were five of these queS-
tons, but only three of them were an
swered The first of these questions was
anor Mf BY aS Within pon or
across the surface of a valid senior loca-
ton for the purpose of defining for or Sc
curing to such junior location underground
or extra lateral rights not in conflict with
any rights of the senior location? This
question was answered in the affirmative.
and one side line of a lode mining claim
as located thereon. can the locator OF such
a vein follow It upon its DIP beyond r, the
also was answered affirmatively. ques-
ton which was answered in the negative
related to the side line of another claim, the
The other mining case was that of W. A.
Clark VS.. William Fitzgerald and others,
covering MOllldild nllHeS. Cu thC
same question as was presented in the sec
ond of the questions as given above. The
opinion of the Montana Supreme Court was
affirmed
Two private land grant cases were de-
cided in the United States Supreme Court
to-day, one involving the claim of M. B.
Hayes to the Chaves grant of 10000 acres
of land in New Mexico and the other the
claim of Earl b. Coe to grant in Arizona.
In both cases the decision was in favor of
the government. the opinion of the Court of
Private Land Claims being affirmed in the
New Mexico case and reversed in the Ari-
IONA case. 80
The Supreme Court decided convictions
under the oleomargarine laws of Pennsyl-
yania and New HAMPSHIRE to be invalid,
thus holding the laws unconstitutional.