Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois

163 U.S. 142, 16 S. Ct. 1096, 41 L. Ed. 107, 1896 U.S. LEXIS 2254
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedMay 18, 1896
Docket217
StatusPublished
Cited by53 cases

This text of 163 U.S. 142 (Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois, 163 U.S. 142, 16 S. Ct. 1096, 41 L. Ed. 107, 1896 U.S. LEXIS 2254 (1896).

Opinion

Me. Justice GS-bay,

after stating the case, delivered the opinion of the court.

The line of railroad communication, crossing the OhioBiver at Cairo, and of which the Illinois Central Bailroad forms part, has been established by Congress as a national highway for the accommodation, of interstate commerce and of the mails of the United States, and as such has been recognized and promoted by the State of Illinois. This will clearly *150 appear by a brief recapitulation of the acts of Congress and the statutes of Illinois upon the subject.

Congress, in the act of September 20, 1850, c. 61, granted a right of way, and sections of the public lands, to the State of Illinois, to aid in the construction of a railroad in that State from the southern termination of the Illinois and Michigan Canal “ to a point at or near the junction of the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers,” with branches to Chicago and Dubuque, “to be and remain a public highway, for the use of the government of the United States, free from toll or other charge upon the transportation of any property or troops of the United States,” and on which the United States mail should “ at all times be transported, under the direction of the Post Office Department, at such price as the. Congress may by law direct;” and, in order “ to aid in the construction of said Central Railroad,” made like grants to the States of Alabama and Mississippi, respectively, for the purpose of aiding in the construction of a railroad from the city of Mobile “ to a point near the mouth of the Ohio River.” 9 Stat. 466.

The manifest purpose of Congress was to establish a railroad in the centre of the Continent, connecting the waters of the Great Lakes with those of the Gulf of Mexico, for the benefit of interstate commerce, as well as of the military and postal departments of the government of the United States.

. The State of Illinois, by a statute of February 10, 1851, chartered the Illinois Central Railroad Company, and ceded to it the rights and lands granted to the State by the act of Congress, for the purpose of constructing and maintaining within the State such a trunk line and branches, describing its southern terminus as “ a point at the city of Cairo,” and declaring “ said road and branches to be free for the use of the United States, and to be employed by the Post-Office Department, as provided in said act of Congress; ” and (as if that were not sufficient) by another statute, a week later, the State expressly accepted the act of Congress, and agreed to be bound by the conditions expressed therein.

By the statute of Illinois of February 2, 1855, all railroad corporations of the State were empowered to make contracts *151 with, each other, and with railroad corporations of other States, for leasing, or running, or connecting their railroads; and by the statute of Illinois of February 25, 1867, railroads terminating at a point at which there was a railroad bridge on a line of continuous railroad thoroughfare were required to be connected by rail, as to make “ an uninterrupted communication over such railroads and bridge as public thoroughfares.”

By the act of June 15, 1866, c. 124, Congress, for the declared purpose of facilitating commerce among the several States, and the postal and military communications of the United States, authorized every railroad company in the United States, whose road was operated by steam, to carry over its road, bridges and ferries, as well passengers and freight, as government mails, troops and supplies, from one State to auother; and to connect, in any State authorizing it to do so, with roads of other States, so as to form continuous lines of transportation. 14 Stat. 66.

By the acts of Congress of December 17, 1872, c. 4, and February 14,1883, c. 44, bridges were authorized to be built across the Ohio Biver by any person or corporation, having lawful authority therefor, and with the approval of the Secretary of "War; and were declared to be lawful structures and post routes for the transmission of the mails and the troops and munitions of war of the United States. 17 Stat. 398; 22 Stat. 414.

It is not denied that the bridge across the Ohio Biver from the Kentucky shore to the Illinois shore, opposite the city of Cairo, was constructed by lawful authority, and as permitted by Congress. Nor is it denied that the Illinois Central Bail-road Company had the right, under the acts of Congress and the statutes of Illinois, to connect its road with that bridge, and to run its southward bound trains over that bridge as part of a system of interstate communication.

But it is contended, on behalf of the State of Illinois, that the station of the Illinois Central Bailroad Company, at the southern terminus of its road in the city of Cairo, having been originally established, and still remaining, at a point some three and a half miles from so much of its main line as forms *152 part of the through communication by railroad from the State of Illinois across the Ohio River to the State of Kentucky and other Southern States, the corporation is obliged, by a statute of the State of Illinois, to cause all its trains, including the fast mail train from Chicago to New Orleans, to be brought down to that station, and to stop there long enough to receive and let off passengers with safety.

The statute in question is as follows: “ Every railroad corporation shall cause its passenger trains to stop upon its arrival at each station, advertised by such corporation as a place for receiving and discharging passengers upon and from such trains, a sufficient length of time to receive and let off such passengers with safety: Provided, all regular passenger trains shall stop a sufficient length of time, at the railroad station of county seats, to receive and let off passengers with safety.” Illinois Rev. Stat. of 1889, c. 114, § 88.

It was argued, in behalf of the railroad company, that the whole effect of this section, was to require each train “ to stop upon its arrival” at a station, long enough to receive and let off passengers with safety; that the first part of the section only required trains to stop upon arrival “ at each station advertised as a place for receiving and discharging passengers upon and from such trains;” that the proviso merely required trains to stop, for a like time, on arriving at “the railroad station of county seats,” although not so advertised; and that no part of the section required any train to arrive at, or to go to, any particular station.

The Supreme Court of the State, however, held that the statute not only required every train to stop at every county seat at which it arrived, but that, as Cairo was admitted to be a county seat, the statute required every train passing through the city of Cairo to go to and stop at the station in that city. The construction given to the statute in this particular by the state court does not involve any Federal question, and must be accepted by this court in judging of the constitutionality of the statute. Chicago &c. Railway v. Minnesota, 134 U. S. 418, 456.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Save Our Illinois Land v. Illinois Commerce Comm'n
2023 IL App (4th) 221038 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 2023)
United States v. City of Pittsburg, Cal.
467 F. Supp. 1080 (N.D. California, 1979)
Mississippi Public Service Comm. v. Illinois Cent. R. R.
67 So. 2d 472 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1953)
Morgan v. Virginia
328 U.S. 373 (Supreme Court, 1946)
Southern Pacific Co. v. Arizona Ex Rel. Sullivan
325 U.S. 761 (Supreme Court, 1945)
First Nat. Ben. Soc. v. Garrison
58 F. Supp. 972 (S.D. California, 1945)
SC Hwy. Dept. v. Barnwell Bros.
303 U.S. 177 (Supreme Court, 1938)
Jackson v. Harris
43 F.2d 513 (Tenth Circuit, 1930)
Southern Pac. Co. v. Peterson
43 F.2d 198 (D. Arizona, 1930)
City of New York v. Federal Radio Commission
36 F.2d 115 (D.C. Circuit, 1929)
Town of St. Martinville v. Dugas
103 So. 761 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1925)
Michigan Public Utilities Commission v. Duke
266 U.S. 570 (Supreme Court, 1925)
Pearson v. Twohy Bros.
231 P. 129 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1924)
Lusk v. Public Service Commission
210 S.W. 72 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1919)
Saint Amand v. Sucreries de Saint Jean
8 P.R. Fed. 437 (D. Puerto Rico, 1916)
Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. State
169 S.W. 385 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1914)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
163 U.S. 142, 16 S. Ct. 1096, 41 L. Ed. 107, 1896 U.S. LEXIS 2254, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/illinois-central-railroad-v-illinois-scotus-1896.