Winona and St Peter Railroad Company v. Blake
| Decision Date | 01 October 1876 |
| Citation | 24 L.Ed. 99,94 U.S. 180 |
| Parties | WINONA AND ST. PETER RAILROAD COMPANY v. BLAKE |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
ERROR to the Supreme Court of the State of Minnesota.
Mr. B. C. Cook and Mr. C. B. Lawrence for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. W. P. Clough, contra.
By its charter, the Winona and St. Peter Railroad Company was incorporated as a common carrier, with all the rights and subject to all the obligations that name implies. It was, therefore, bound to carry, when called upon for that purpose, and charge only a reasonable compensation for the carriage. These are incidents of the occupation in which it was authorized to engage. There is nothing in the charter limiting the power of the State to regulate the rates of charge. The provision in the act of Feb. 28, 1866, that the 'company shall be bound to carry freight and passengers upon reasonable terms,' and that in the Constitution of Minnesota (art. 10, sect. 4), that 'all corporations being common carriers, . . . shall be bound to carry the mineral, agricultural, and other productions or manufactures on equal and reasonable terms,' add nothing to and take nothing from the grant as contained in the original charter.
This case, therefore, falls directly within our rulings in Munn v. Illinois; Chicago, Burlington, & Quincy Railroad Company v. Iowa; Peik v. Chicago & North-western Railway Company; and Chicago, Milwaukee, & St. Paul Railroad Company v. Ackley, supra.
NOTE.—In Southern Minnesota Railroad Company v. Coleman, error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota, which was argued by Mr. H. J. Horn and Mr. G. E. Cole for the plaintiff in error, and by Mr. E. C. Palmer for the defendant in error, MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE, in delivering the opinion of the court, remarked: This case, in all its essential facts, is precisely like that of Winona & St. Peter Railroad Company v. Blake, supra. The judgment of the Circuit Court is, therefore, affirmed upon the authority of that case, and for the reasons stated in the opinions which have just been read.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
George Simpson v. David Shepard No 291 George Simpson v. Emma Kennedy No 292 George Simpson v. William Shillaber No 293
...B. & Q. R. Co. v. Cutts) 94 U. S. 155, 24 L. ed. 94; Peik v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co. 94 U. S. 164, 24 L. ed. 97; Winona & St. P. R. Co. v. Blake, 94 U. S. 180, 24 L. ed. 99, and other cases, following Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 113, 24 L. ed. 77. The question was presented by acts of the leg......
-
Home Tel. & Tel. Co. v. City of Los Angeles
...... city, and lower than any other company than plaintiff now. charges for telephone service in said ...We. . . [155 F. 563] . said in the Railroad Commission Cases, 116 U.S. 307, 325, 6. Sup.Ct. 334, 342, ... telephone service ( Winona, etc., Co. v. Blake, 94. U.S. 180, 24 L.Ed. 99), and ......
-
R.R. Comm'n Of Ga. v. Louisville & N. R. Co
...& Northwestern R. Co., 94 U. S. 164, 24 L. Ed. 97; Railroad Co. v. Richmond, 96 U. S. 521, 529, 24 L. Ed. 734; Winona & St. Peter R. Co. v. Blake, 94 U. S. 180, 24 L. Ed. 99. Of the three propositions above stated the first remains undisputed. The third has been considerably modified or cha......
-
Railroad Commission of Georgia v. Louisville & N. R. Co.
...... the same on the train of the company selling the same, when. presented by the holders for transportation ... Railroad Co. v. Richmond, 96 U.S. 521, 529, 24 L.Ed. 734; Winona & St. Peter R. Co. v. Blake, 94 U.S. 180, 24 L.Ed. 99. Of the three ......