Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1904-04-27
DISMISSED WITH COSTS.
Decision by Law Court in Knox County
Case.
The following decision has bee

LIMERICK Railroad co. ReScript by
Wiswell, G. j.
The mere fact that a railroad COM
pany builds a branch track for the i'm
mediate purpose of accommodating 4
private business enterprise, is by no
means a controlling test to determine
whether the right of way therefor is
taken for private purposes, or for pub
| tic use, by right of eminent domain.
While the power of eminent domain
should not be so extended as to allow
the taking of private property by one
| for the private benefit of another, 1t
should noIbe so abridged as to inter-
| fcre with the development of enter
prises of public nature, within the
meaning of the constitution.
BY the great weight of authority, the
decisive tests as to whether a branch
railroad track is for public or private
purposes, are these: Is the track to be
open to the public, on equal terms to
all having occasion at any time to use
! it. so that all can demand that they be
served without discrimination, as of
right? If so. and the track is subject
10 governmental control under general
laws, as are the main lines of Il rail-
case a proper one for the exercise OF
the right of eminent domain.
In Farnsworth VS.. LIMERICK Railroad
Co., SO Maine, 4i0 the purpose of this
particular railroad, so far as its main
line is concerned, viz: The transporta-
ton OF limestone and other freight to
and from the lime kilns and stores
along its line. was declared to be Il
public use. In order to perform bust
ness of this nature, it is absolutely es-
sential that connections should be made
with the different lime kilns, in fanny
instances by branch tracks.
| While legislative determination that
The use for which property authorized
to be taken by eminent domain is
public one, is undoubtedly, subject to
review by the courts, yet it is a famil-
lar principle that all reasonable pre-
sumptions are in favor of the correct
ness of the legislative decision; and
the act must be regarded as valid, I'M
less it can be clearly shown to be con-
fiict with Constitution.
The exercise of the power of eminent
domain for the purpose of acquiring a
right of way for IL branch track, is, an
effect, a declaration by the railroad
company that the track is to be open to
the public and operated as public way
and subject to all public rights and
| public control.
If the purpose OF a railroad corpora
ton in building any particular branch
track. is to operate the same in con-
formlty with the foregoing require
ments, the power of eminent domain
granted by the legislature may be-
properly exercised, even though few
may have occasion to be served by the
branch, outside of the owners of tfe1
quarry to which it is constructed ~
A business or manufacturing corpora
ton by owning nearly Ill the stock of
railroad corporation. does not thereby
become the owner of the railroad COM
pany'S road, franchises or other proper
ty. A railroad company, whoever may
be the owner of it's stock, still owns its
property.
control of the property of a corpora
ton is not in it's stockholders Of
course. 4 majority of stockholders con-
troll the election of its officers and
agents. But the control of the COM
pany's property is in the corporation
itself, and in its officers and agents,
virtue of the bylaws
Railroad franchises must be exercised
by the corporation to which they are
granted. and by it alone.
a corporation is an entity, irrespec-
tive of the persons who own all of it's |
stock; and the fact that one person |
owns all the stock does not make such
owner and the corporation one and the
same person. Neither is there any
identity between the Individual or the
corporation which owns such stock in
another corporation, and the latter cor
poration.
If railroad corporation unreasonable
fails to perform the public duty for which |
it was chartered. and tne management
makes discrimination clearly showing an
intention to exclude from the benefits oe
the road all except its principal stock
holders. for the purpose of preventing |
competition. it might be sufficient to |
work forfeiture of the railroad COM
panyS franchises.
1t cannot be the duty of a railroad COM
pany however, to build branch track |
quarry simply because such connection
may be desired by the owner. indepen-
IDENTITY OF the question of the cost of con- |
StrGctlon ana the probable income to be |
derived.
1t is the duty of the management of a |
railroad company. before entering into
new construction. to take into considera-
tion both the probable cost of the same !
ana the amount of freight which would |
be obtained therefrom for transportation.
So long as the directors of a railroad |
corporation act in good faith upon such
questions their determination is conclusive
and is not subject to review by proceed |
ings in court
The question whether or not a railroad |
corporation has DONE or failed to do any
thing which should result in forfeiture /
OF It's franchises. can only be inquired in
to by a proceeding appropriate for that
purpose, such as an information in the ma
ture of quo warranto, instituted by the /
proper authorities in behalf of the state
The defendant. the Limrock Railroad
Company, on January 20, 1903 commenced
proceedings to condemn. under its power
OF eminent domain a right of way over
the land of the cOmplainants for the pur- /
pose of building thereon a branch track |
from one of its main lines to lime quar-
ry owned by the Rockland- Rockport Lime
Co. No question is raised as to the form
or sufiiciency of the proceedings COM
menced by the railroad company for the
purpose OF acquiring by condemnation
this right of way: but in their bill the
compartments ask that the railroad may l.
restrained fIo,-