Source: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/164/403/
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 15:54:50+00:00

Document:
The Supreme Court of Nebraska has construed this statute as authorizing the Board of Transportation to make the order questioned in this case, which required the railroad company to grant to the relators the right to erect an elevator upon its right of way at Elmwood station on the same terms and conditions on which it had already granted to other persons rights to erect two elevators thereon. The construction so given to the statute by the highest court of the state must be accepted by this Court in judging whether the statute conforms to the Constitution of the United States. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway v. Minnesota, 134 U. S. 418, 134 U. S. 456; Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois, 163 U. S. 142, 163 U. S. 152.
public use for which it was incorporated, and may, in its discretion, permit them to be occupied by other parties with structures convenient for the receipt and delivery of freight upon its railroad, so long as a free and safe passage is left for the carriage of freight and passengers. Grand Trunk Railroad v. Richardson, 91 U. S. 454. But how far the railroad company can be compelled to do so against its will is a wholly different question.
Nor does this case show any such exercise of the legislative power to regulate the conduct of the business, or the rate of tolls, fees, or charges either of railroad corporations or of the proprietors of elevators, as has been upheld by this Court in previous cases. Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 113; Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 155; Dow v. Beidelman, 125 U. S. 680; Budd v. New York, 143 U. S. 517; Brass v. North Dakota, 153 U. S. 391; Covington & Cincinnati Bridge Co. v. Kentucky, 154 U. S. 204, 154 U. S. 213-214; Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Kentucky, 161 U. S. 677, 161 U. S. 696.
This Court, confining itself to what is necessary for the decision of the case before it, is unanimously of opinion that the order in question, so far as it required the railroad corporation to surrender a part of its land to the petitioners for the purpose of building and maintaining their elevator upon it, was in essence and effect a taking of private property of the railroad corporation for the private use of the petitioners. The taking by a state of the private property of one person or corporation, without the owner's consent, for the private use of another is not due process of law, and is a violation of the fourteenth article of amendment of the Constitution of the United states. Wilkinson v. Leland, 2 Pet. 627, 27 U. S. 658; Murray v. Hoboken Co., 18 How. 272, 59 U. S. 276; Loan Association v. Topeka, 20 Wall. 655; Davidson v. New Orleans, 96 U. S. 97, 96 U. S. 102; Cole v. La Grange, 113 U. S. 1; Fallbrook District v. Bradley, 164 U. S. 112, 164 U. S. 158, 164 U. S. 161; State v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway, 36 Minn. 402.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.