United States v. Union Pacific Railway Co.

160 U.S. 1, 16 S. Ct. 190, 40 L. Ed. 319, 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2342
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedNovember 18, 1895
Docket334
StatusPublished
Cited by81 cases

This text of 160 U.S. 1 (United States v. Union Pacific Railway Co.) 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. Union Pacific Railway Co., 160 U.S. 1, 16 S. Ct. 190, 40 L. Ed. 319, 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2342 (1895).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Hablan

delivered the opinion of the court.

This suit was brought by the United States against the Union Pacific Eailway Company and the Western Union Telegraph Company under the authority of the act of Congress'of August 7, 1888, c. JY2, 25 Stat. 382, supplementary to the act commonly known as the Pacific Eailroad act of July 1, 1862, c. 120, 12-Stat. 489, and to the act of July 2, 1864, c. 216, 13 Stat. 356, and other acts amendatory of the act of 1862.

By the first section of the above act of 1888, it is provided that all railroad and telegraph companies to which the United States have granted any subsidy in lands or bonds or loan of *4 credit for the construction of either railroad or telegraph lines, and which, by the acts incorporating them, or by any amendatory or supplementary act, were required to construct, maintain, or operate telegraph lines, and all companies engaged in operating such railroad or telegraph lines' “ shall forthwith and henceforward, by and through their own respective corporate officers and employes, maintain, and operate, for railroad, governmental, commercial, and all other purposes, telégraph lines, and exercise by themselves alone all the telegraph franchises conferred upon them and obligations assumed by them under the acts making the grants as aforesaid.”.

The second section declares that any telegraph company, having accepted the provisions of Title LXV, Telegraphs, of the Revised Statutes, which should extend its line to any station or office of a telegraph line belonging to any one of the railroad or telegraph companies referred to in the first section, shall have the right and shall be allowed “to. connect with the telegraph line of said railroad or telegraph company to which it is extended at the place where their lines may meet, for the prompt and convenient interchange of telegraph business between said companies; and such, railroad and telegraph companies, referred to in the first section of this act, shall so operate their respective telegraph lines as to afford equal facilities to all, without discrimination in favor of or against any person, company, or corporation whatever, and shall receive, deliver, and exchange business with connecting telegraph lines on equal terms, and affording equal facilities, and without discrimination for or against any one of such connecting lines; and such exchange of business shall be on terms just and equitable.”

If any railroad or telegraph company referred to in the first section, or any company operating such railroad or telegraph line, refuses or fails, in whole or in part, to rqaintain and operate a telegraph -line as provided in the act of 1888 and the acts to which it is supplementary, “ for the use of the Government or the public, for commercial and other purposes, without discrimination,” or refuses or fails to make or continue such arrangements for the interchange of business with any connecting telegraph company, then, by the third section, application for *5 relief may be made to the Interstate Commerce Commission, whose duty it shall be to ascertain the facts, and prescribe such arrangement as will be proper in the particular case.

The fourth section is in these words : In order to secure and preserve to the United States the full value and benefit of its liens upon all the telegraph lines required to be constructed by and lawfully belonging to said railroad and telegraph companies referred to in the first section of this act, and to have the same possessed, used, and operated in conformity with the provisions of this act and of the several acts to which this act is supplementary, it is hereby made the duty of the Attorney General of the United States, by proper proceedings, to prevent any unlawful interference with the rights and equities of the United States under this act, and under the acts hereinbefore mentioned, and under all acts of Congress relating to such railroads and telegraph lines, and to have legally ascertained and finally adjudicated all alleged rights of all .persons and corporations whatever claiming in any manner any control or interest of any kind in any telegraph lines or property, or exclusive rights of way upon the lands of said railroad companies, or any of them, and to have all contracts and provisions of contracts set aside and annulled which have been unlawfully and beyond their powers entered into by said railroad or telegraph companies, or any of them, with any other person, company, or corporation.”

The fifth section subjects to fine and imprisonment any officer or agent of a company operating its railroads and telegraph lines who refuses or fails, in such operation and use, to afford and secure equal facilities to the government and the public, or to secure to each of said connecting telegraph lines equal advantages and facilities in the interchange of business, as provided for, without any discrimination whatever for or adverse to the telegraph line of any or either of said connecting companies, or refuses to abide by or perform and carry out within a reasonable time the order or orders of the Interstate Commerce Commission. The party aggrieved may also sue the company, whose officer or agent violates the provisions of the act, for any damages thereby sustained.

*6 .The sixth section makes it the duty of all railroads and telegraph companies to report to the Interstate Commerce Commission in relation to certain matters, and to file with that body copies of all contracts and agreements of every description between it and every other person or corporation in reference to the ownership, possession, maintenance, control, use, or operation of any telegraph lines or property over -or upon its rights of way.

The defendant, the Union Pacific Railway Company, is a corporation formed by the consolidation (under the authority of the above acts of Congress of July 1, 1862, c. 120, 12 Stat. 489, and July 2, 1864, 13 Stat. c. 216, 356) of the following companies: The Union Pacific Railroad- Company, incorporated by the act of July 1, 1862; the Kansas Pacific Railway Company, formerly known as the Union Pacific Railway Company, Eastern Division, which latter company succeeded to the rights and powers of the Leavenworth, Pawnee and Western Railroad Company, a Kansas corporation that accepted the aid provided by the act of July 1, 1862 ; and the Denver Pacific Railway and Telegraph Company, a corporation of Colorado.

The present suit proceeds on the ground-that the Union Pacific Railway Company is conducting its business under certain contracts and agreements with the Western Union Telegraph Company that are not only repugnant to the provisions of the above act of 1888, but are inconsistent with the rights of the United States, and in violation of the obligations imposed upon the railway company by other acts of Congress. The relief asked was a decree annulling those contracts and agreements and compelling the railway company to maintain and operate-telegraph lines on its roadways, as required by the act of 1888.

By the final decree of the Circuit Court it was adjudged,, among other things, that the following agreements be annulled and held for naught:

An agreement of October 1, 1866, between the Union Pacific Railway Company, Eastern Division, and the Western Union Telegraph Company;

Two agreements, one of September 1, 1869, and.

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

Related

Munoz v. PHH Mortgage Corp.
E.D. California, 2025
Pharmaceutical Research v. Stuart Williams
64 F.4th 932 (Eighth Circuit, 2023)
Bynoe v. Helling
D. Nevada, 2022
Moore v. Doe
S.D. California, 2019
Goss v. MAN Roland
2006 DNH 088 (D. New Hampshire, 2006)
Cecil Marvin Hurt v. United States
327 F.2d 978 (Eighth Circuit, 1964)
Milton R. Dusky v. United States
295 F.2d 743 (Eighth Circuit, 1961)
In re Solar Mfg. Corp.
102 F. Supp. 859 (D. New Jersey, 1952)
Deckert v. Independence Shares Corporation
39 F. Supp. 592 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1941)
Iowa City v. Iowa City Light & Power Co.
90 F.2d 679 (Eighth Circuit, 1937)
Alexander v. Hillman
296 U.S. 222 (Supreme Court, 1935)
Pratt v. Weeks
1 F. Supp. 953 (S.D. Florida, 1932)
Moffett v. Fiske
51 F.2d 868 (D.C. Circuit, 1931)
People of Porto Rico v. Livingston
47 F.2d 712 (First Circuit, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
160 U.S. 1, 16 S. Ct. 190, 40 L. Ed. 319, 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2342, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-union-pacific-railway-co-scotus-1895.