The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1907-08-06

THE ALABAMA CASE.
/. An act was passed by the Gen
eraI Assembly Of Alabama preScr1b-
ing certain maximum rates Of toll TO
be charged on a bridge across a river
in the State.
.. The act declared that should the
owners. lessees or operators Of the
mand or receive from any person a
higher rate of toll than that pre-
scribed, he or they should forfeit 20
such person $40 for each offense.
3. When the act was passed there
was pending in the Federal court a
case in which the defendant was re-
ceiver of the company that owned the
bridge.
4. The receiver, McGnee prayed,
that process of subpoena be issued to
and served upon the State of Ala
bama, the governor and attorney gen.
eral Of the State, and that an injunc-
ton De granted prohibiting and re-
straining them and all persons from
i%nstituting any proceeding under the
forfeiture clause Of the act.
5. A temporary injunction was is
sued restraining the governor, attor-
ney general of the State and all per-
sons whomsoever from i~nstituting or
prosecuting any proceedings under the
forfeiture clause.
6. The defendants appeared special
ly and moved that the bill be dis
missed upon the ground that the suit
was one against the State, and pro-
hiblted by the constitution OF the
United States.
Z. The plaintiffs alleged in their
amended complaint that frequent de-
mands had been made by persons on
foot and on horseback to pass them
over the bridge at the rate of toll
fixed by the act, and upon the re-
fusal of the toll-gate keeper to per-
nit them to pass by the payment Of
the rate so fixed, n his requiring
them to pay the rates OF toll fixed
by the plaintiffs, they had paid the
tolls so required of them under pro-
test and had threatened to institute
suits against the plaintiffs under the
penalty clause of the act, and had
also threatened to procure proceed
ings to be instituted n the courts by
tie governor and attorney general;
ard that tnc persons SO threatening
suits were too numerous to be made
parties to that suit.
g. 4 tatu; ot Atabama makes the
receiving of mere for toll tha2 is al
lowed by lazy q misdcr1eanOr.
8. Plaintiffs amended complaint al
1eges tina more than one hundred in
dictments were found against toll
gate keepers OF defendant for charg-
.nE more toll than is authorized in
the act.
10. The amended complaint al
$4,000 %La+ ,-nrn
Wrongfully found against said toll
gate keepers, and are being improp-
erly prosecuted because the rate of
toll which they a charged is only
the rate which has heretofore been
FIXED by the receivers and authorized
by the court. and said indictments
have been found and are being prose-
cuted in violation of the authority of
this court and of it's orders in the
premises, and in violation Of their
constitutional rights and privileges
under the constitution of the United
States. The solicitor was made a par
ty to it's action and Injunction asked
against him.
Ii. BY supplemental bill it was al
legged that writs of arrest a been is
sued upon the above indictments
against Glen and Brabson. and placed
in the hands of the sheriff, who in
execution thereof had arrested, or
Woulu diIpSl, tie Sdlu eIIl ploy6eS OF
said receivers. 1t was further alleged
that these criminal proceedings We're
in contempt of the order of the court
appointing the receivers, as we'll as in
violation of the injunction which the
court had issued.
IL. The PLAINTIFF after referring to
the Indictments. and the purpose of
the state officers to proceed under
them, prayed that the act be declared
r~epugnant to the Constitution of the
United States.
IS. At his stage of the proceedings
the plaintiffs dismissed the cause so
far as the State was made a party
defendant. and amended the bill by
striking out its name as a defendant.
II. Upon the fling of the last
amendment to the original bill, it was
ordered by the court that Carmichael.
as solicitor. be enjoined and restrained
from instituting or prosecuting as
such solicitor any indictment or crimi-
nal proceeding against any one for q
violation of the alleged unconstitu-
tional act of the legislature of Ala
bama.
Is. The next step in the proceed
ings was the suing out of writs of ha-
peas orp by Glenn and Brabson.
who were under arrest on process is
sued on the indictments. Both defend
ants were released on their own re-
cognizance.
16. The final decree in the case
held that the act fixing maximum tolls
TO be charged for said bridge is vio-
lative of the constitutional rights of
the owners of said bridge in that it
fixes a rate of tolls for said bridge
which are not fairly and reasonably
compensatory. and it is therefore
hereby declared to be invalid and in
operative and the injunctions hereto
fore granted in the cause are hereby
made perpetual.
OPINION CFTHE SUPREME COZ