United States v. Sioux City & Pacific Railroad

Supreme Court

United States v. Sioux City & Pacific Railroad

99 U.S. 491, 25 L. Ed. 292, 1878 U.S. LEXIS 1564

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJanuary 27, 1879

Docket590

StatusPublished

This text of 99 U.S. 491 (United States v. Sioux City & Pacific Railroad) 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

United States v. Sioux City & Pacific Railroad, 99 U.S. 491, 25 L. Ed. 292, 1878 U.S. LEXIS 1564 (1879).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Bradley

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was an action brought by the United States against the defendant in the court below to recover five per cent of its net earnings.

The facts of the case were admitted by the parties, and, amongst others, the following: —

“ 5. That if the amount paid by the company as hereinbefore stated for interest on its first-mortgage bonds during said time should, under the law, be deducted from the receipts of the company in order to ascertain the net earnings thereof, then there were no net earnings during said time; but if, on the other hand, the said payments of interest should not be deducted from the earnings of the road to ascertain the net earnings, then the net earnings of the road during said period amounted to the sum of four hundred and seven thousand seven hundred and ninety-nine -^°¶ dollars ($407,799.50).”

It thus appears that, although the company made net earnings to the amount of $407,799.50, during the period covered by the time in respect of which the suit was brought, yet that they were all absorbed by the interest accruing on the first-mortgage bonds. According to the principles laid down in our decision, Union Pacific Railroad Co. v. United States (supra, p. 402), the government cannot claim the five per cent which v ould otherwise be applicable to its subsidy.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Justice Strong and Mr. Justice Harlan dissented.

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

Mr. Justice Bradley

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was an action brought by the United States against the defendant in the court below to recover five per cent of its net earnings.

The facts of the case were admitted by the parties, and, amongst others, the following: —

“ 5. That if the amount paid by the company as hereinbefore stated for interest on its first-mortgage bonds during said time should, under the law, be deducted from the receipts of the company in order to ascertain the net earnings thereof, then there were no net earnings during said time; but if, on the other hand, the said payments of interest should not be deducted from the earnings of the road to ascertain the net earnings, then the net earnings of the road during said period amounted to the sum of four hundred and seven thousand seven hundred and ninety-nine -^°¶ dollars ($407,799.50).”

It thus appears that, although the company made net earnings to the amount of $407,799.50, during the period covered by the time in respect of which the suit was brought, yet that they were all absorbed by the interest accruing on the first-mortgage bonds. According to the principles laid down in our decision, Union Pacific Railroad Co. v. United States (supra, p. 402), the government cannot claim the five per cent which v ould otherwise be applicable to its subsidy.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Justice Strong and Mr. Justice Harlan dissented.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 U.S. 491, 25 L. Ed. 292, 1878 U.S. LEXIS 1564, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-sioux-city-pacific-railroad-scotus-1879.