The Saint Paul globe., 1901-01-03

Of ninety-nihe years. and compel the
Western Union company curing tie
term Of ten years to build at its own
cu-t telegraph lines along ell extensions
Of the "a ilToads, a large amount OF
;19hich Vas actually built bat a Very
term, when. according u ~ claim OF
the complainant, all the telegraph prop
erty would pass Immediately to tho CON-
plan2nt by reason of the lapse of thee
%rarh ce.,--cc,ny under them at the end of
tic ten ytITs.
But. supposing that en- July /, 1892 in
stead of entering into the contract of
that GATE, the parties lad simply by q
writing, under seal OF the two comp anies,
2brogated all cortre IT'S between the par
ties, and entered into no new or ;u.tfeT
contract What would be the condition
IN which that would leave each of there
parties in respect to the right of proper
ty In these telegraph lines? Would they
Immediately pass to the railroad com
panY, or would the telegraph company
remain the owner of the lines? The
lines We're built by the telegraph COM
pany, or by its lessons, and the ai'roa1
company had perhaps some rights in re-
Spect TO wires strung by it for its sepa-
rate use under the contracts The tele-
graph lines were built upon the right OF
way which was granted by s.e railroad
company ana its predecessors to t.e
Predecessors of the telegraph company.
Abrogating the contracts would not be
reconveyance of the tie which had been
granted to the telegraph companies. it
seems to me that the only effect OF such
abrogation would be TO put an end to toe
particular stipula tions In relation to re-
pairs and TO the cost of construction of
new telegraph lines, and in relation to
the use of the telegraph as between The
companies. I,h railroad would Ee no
longer obliged to carry free the material
or the men required for the building OF
the telegraph lines, or TO supply labor in
the repair OF them, and the telegram
company would be no longer Obliged to
send messages free for the railroad COM
pahy. None of those executory provi-
slons would remain obligatory after the
contract was abrogated But the \ or -a,,-
ton of the contract would not affo.t Ine
provisions which had been executed d
which had already vest ed PFC operty right
IN TIE one party OF the other go that my
impression Is that 1t would leave the
ownership of the right of Wav of the
telegraph lines in the telegraph com
panies 1t does not matter whether tie
Iltle would be In the Northwestern COM
pahH or the Western Union COM
panE. as there is no contest re-
L"eeh those two companies. Besides the
Western l Mon company could not by any
Gontract isHe aneGt the property right OF its
1t docs not seem to me, therefore. that
need consider the effect of the acts of
congress with respect to the rights of the
the act of July "a, 1866, or any other of
the acts of congress referred to on the
argument. The case may be disposed of
9,iy S11,9iy upon tie contracts between the
Parties themselves.
This contract OF July !, 1882 while it
pufpoSts TO supersede ell previous con
tracts, and cancel especially the contract
OF Oct. is, 1879, does not seem 10 contain
any provision that can affect the rights
Of property rs they We're vested al that
lin1e aEd before tfat last contract vas
e!tefed INTO There is no conveyance,
and there IS no provision that there shall
DC any change of title or possession at
the end of the ten year term. There is a
provision which grants the telegraph com
ply t" curing toe existence of that con-
tiact Tor those ten years, an exclusive
l!gnC OF way on, along and upon or m
der lines and bridges of the railway and
on on any extensions or branches thereof
uuiIh& tndt ten year term; but that does
net, seem tC be Inconsistent with the facf
u q II mad right of way before or that
i.;s',' itS.4eSsof Or mad right of way not exclu-
d,tion&l and rot inconsistent with the oth-
St' ana as both would be of the
benefit to the grantee, it would be nra
ts,Il Snlned that IT would retain both of them.
Ihere is nowhere in thar contract anv nro
T'3lon that at the end of ten Years tho
telegraph company shall abandon the line.
or tele graph, or its use, or turn over She.
pt,7F ess1on @ OF 1t TO The railway company.
Now. looking at that contract carefully.
seems tC' me that it only ahrCpat[s]
the opera ting and eXecutory provisions Cf
the previous contracts; and that must he
IT'S only effect unless It operates as n
III eNahc~ uf property rights; and that
~ gees rot &c. There are nc words in
II IRON which any such intention ca7 ha
tt!!l:errcd, me- nor can 1t be from anything
When we consider the situation of fhn
parties. and their interests, there an
pears TO be nothing, either IN the language
OF the contract or in the srrronndine eiI,-
CulnStances from which that intentian can.
ne inferred; and, as | have said bAfora
thefe Is - provision that at the end 0f
t.l,s Inc teain m ule existing rights Of property
small rot continue This particular cor
fact aut thofiHes the bull ling of cxtensions
ana lhe CEera ton Of the same bv tho fola
kIaph COMPANY like the telegraph Ines
eraI UUi1911 uceeu ana as part OF the ger
tI e[di system OF the telegraph company.
CoiSlGerab4e changes are made in IT'S nrH.
VISIONS from those contained in tine nra-
~. 1Iur:' contracts as TO many other matters
Inns = MS contract gives the railroad company
the f;ght to use the entire telegraph svs
TEN OF the Western Union company q
system winch extends, according to Inc
go statotteHt tod OF counsel, throughout all The
SttteS' or ar any rate, far beyond The
Ilts ntnlts OF these telegraph lines chat We're
Delng built in connection with thic rai1
road. 1t relieves the railroad company
from paying half Of the ccst or eXpenses
OIL bWlcing the extensions of the lines of
telegraph that We're ID be constructed
60, this contract for it's term of zen
SoiH' WINE II COnldlf>S some conditions
lnaC are more favorable to the teIe
Sfaph company than these contained in
tue previous contract, leads me to think
that ha the changes are far more consider
ABLY IN favor. of The Iaircad company
man OF the telegraph company, ard that
1t contains nothing that can be regard
ca as consideration for the givine; up
or the abandonment OF this yainabie
property.
The facts that under tile last contract
the telegraph lines We're operated sub
stantlally as before, While the entire cost
0I az new construction was to be borne
Ny the Telegraph company, and that the
contract ccntainG TO language from which
lne intention now claimed by the com
plalnant can be inferred, lead me to the
conclusion tEat tie telegraph companiaS
sun own the telegraph property the same
as they did before the contract was
made; and have the same interests in
that prt pertY which they had at anv
prior time; and the railroad company
mas the same Interests therein which i
had before that contract was made. and
no greater
4 decree may be drawn to conform
with the conclusions indicated This
seems TO have been an amicabIe action
commenced with the consent of all she
partes ana for the purpose of determin-
ing the rights Of the parties; and there
fGfe it is an action in which no costs
should be allowed. [ think that perhaps
nave stated enough to enable COUNSEL.
TO draw the proper decree in the ease
Its terms If not agreed to may be settlf,1
upon two Gay notice.
The Twentieth Century.