The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1912-06-08
D. i. RS CLAIM OF STATE
CONTROL THROWN OUT BY
COURT IN SIMILAR CASE
Same Contention Denied When
Made BY Toll Bridge Com
pany In Grand Rapids
CITIES RIGHTS UPHELD
Point Will Be Fought Out When
Rental Case Is Argued
Next Tuesday

The contention by the ID. U. r. In
the second brief filed In the Fort-st.
rental case, news of which was re-
ported exclusively in The Times, Fri
day, that where franchises have eh>
pired, the railroad may continue oper-
ating indefinitely. subject only to reg
ulation by the state railroad commits
sion, will be one OF the chief issues to
be fought out before the supreme
court in Lansing, when the hearing
takes place next Tuesday.
The company contends that the city
Is only the agent of the state, that the
state having incorporated the COM
pany to operate a railroad, and, lines
having been established, the lines can
not be withdrawn from the public.
The same point was raised in the
supreme court of the United States
by a railroad operating In Worcester,
Mass. II was claimed that the state
has final control Of all the railroads
aud the rates and conditions of oper-
alton.
The point was sustained by the ST.
preme court and the case Is cited IN
the company's brief. Corporation
Counsel Lawson examined into this
phase of the situation, and believes
that the constitution of Massachusetts
is different in that respect from the
constitution of Michigan. In Massa-
chusetts, it was held that the cities
are onl yagencies OF the state, while
In Michigan the constitution and the
legislature have given greater power
to the municipalities. Mr.. Lawson
says the decision of the supreme court
does not apply In Michigan.
Another case was found In the de-
cisions OF the supreme court OF Michi-
gan which bears a striking similarity
to the claim set forth by the ID. u. X,
that by reason of incorporation. its
rights in the streets extend beyond
the period of the franchises.
In this case, a bridge company was
incorporated for 80 years for the pur-
pose of building and operating a toll
bridge in Grand Rapids. The local
authorities granted the company 20
year franchise. fixing the toll At the
expiration. ofttiies franchise, tI,b coin
pany continued to operate the bridge
the same as though its franchise had
not expired. The local authorities
brought suit to stop the company
and the company answered that the
state having incorporated the com
pany to operate the bridge, and. the
bridge having been established as a
highway, the company was entitled to
continue the operation of the bridge
until the expiration of 80 years, the
period of its Incorporation. II denied
that the local authorities had any con-
troll over it after the expiration of the
franchise.
The supreme court decided against
the company. 1t held, in effect, that
its Incorporation had nothing to do
with the local situation, and could not
modify in any way its relationship
with the city, in other words, II could
only conduct its business by the suf-
ferance of and the teyms laid down
by the local authorities.
The d. U. RS latest brief has a half
dozen pages devoted to the constitn-
tional aspect OF the case, and 1t is
made clear that IL II loses in the
state supreme court, IL will immedi-
ately appeal to the United States
court. alleging that II has been de-
prived of its constitutional rights.