Angle v. Chicago, St Ry Co

Decision Date03 January 1894
Docket NumberNo. 73,73
Citation151 U.S. 1,14 S.Ct. 240,38 L.Ed. 55
PartiesANGLE v. CHICAGO, ST. P., M. & O. RY. CO
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

[Syllabus from pages 1-3 intentionally omitted]

Statement by Mr. Justice BREWER:

This is an appeal from a decree of the circuit court of the United States for the western district of Wisconsin dismissing plaintiff's bill.

The bill was filed on the 23d of May, 1888, against the Chicago, Portage & Superior Railway Company, the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Company, and the Farmers' Loan & Trust Company. The Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Company was the only defendant served with process. It appeared, and on the 28th of July filed a demurrer to the bill, which, after argument, was sustained, and on September 2, 1889, the decree of dismissal was entered. 39 Fed. 143, 912.

The facts as stated in the bill are as follows: By two acts, of date June 3, 1856, and May 5, 1864, respectively, (11 Stat. 20, and 13 Stat. 66,) congress granted lands to the state of Wisconsin to aid in the construction of certain railroads, among others one 'from a point on the St. Croix river or lake, between townships 25 and 31, to the west end of Lake Superior, and from some point on the line of said railroad, to be selected by said state, to Bayfield.' These land grants were accepted by an act of the legislature approved October 8, 1856, (Laws Wis. 1856, p. 137,) and by a joint resolution of the legislature of the state of date March 20, 1865, (Gen. Laws Wis. 1865, p. 689,) and a map of definite location was duly filed, and accepted by the secretary of the interior.

By an act of March 4, 1874, (Laws Wis. 1874, p. 186,) the state granted to the North Wisconsin Railway Company, whose name was subsequently changed to Chicago St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Company, and who is the defendant herein, (to be hereafter called the Omaha Company,) that portion of the land grant applicable to the construction of the road from a point on St. Croix river to Bayfield, and to the Chicago & Northern Pacific Air-Line Railway Company, whose name was subsequently, and before 1878, changed to that of the Chicago, Portage & Superior Railway Company, (hereafter called the Portage Company,) so much of said grant as was applicable to the construction of the road from the west end of Lake Superior to a junction with the line running from St. Croix rever to Bayfield.

The eighth section of this act, which is the granting section to the latter company, is as follows:

'There is hereby granted to the Chicago and Northern Pacific Air-Line Railway Company all the right, title, and interest which the state of Wisconsin now has, or may hereafter acquire, in or to that portion of the lands granted to said state by said two acts of congress as is or can be made applicable to the construction of that part of the railway ctober 8, 1856, (Laws Wis. 1856, point of intersection of the branches of said grants, as fixed by the surveys and maps on file in the land office at Washington, and the west end of Lake Superior. This grant is made upon the express condition that said company shall construct, complete, and put in operation that part of its said railway above mentioned as soon as a railway shall be constructed and put in operation from the city of Hudson to said point of intersection, and within five years from its acceptance of said lands as herein provided, and shall also construct and put in operation the railway of said company from Genoa northerly, at the rate of twenty miles per year.'

The value of the lands thus granted was, at the time of the wrongs hereinafter described, $4,000,000.

By section 12 the company was required within 60 days to file with the secretary of state an acceptance of the grant upon the terms and conditions named therein, and also such security for the construction of the road as should be required by the governor. Both of these conditions were complied with.

Genoa, named in section 8, was the town on the southern boundary of the state of Wisconsin at which the line of the Chicago & Northern Pacific Air-Line Railway entered the state; and Hudson was the place on the St. Croix river, described in the acts of congress as the initial point of the road to be aided.

On March 16, 1878, an act was passed by the legislature of Wisconsin (Laws Wis. 1878, p. 442) extending the time for the construction of the Portage Company's road three years.

In the panic of 1873-74 the Portage Company had broken down under a load of debts and embarrassments, and remained inactive until 1880. At that time it secured the services of Willis Gaylord to assist in extricating it from its embarrassments, and in continuing the construction of its road. William H. Schofield, an experienced railway projector and financier, was induced to accept the office of president, and the co-operation and assistance of the New York, New England & Western Investment Company (hereafter called the Investment Company) was secured.

A new mortgage for $25,000 a mile, and a new issue of stock, was provided for. Seven hundred thousand dollars of the new bonds and one million of the new stock were to be issued in full satisfaction of all outstanding stock, bonds, and other demands. In pursuance of these arrangements, it issued certificates of stock for $1,000,000, in the name of A. A. Jackson, general solicitor of the Portage Company, which, indorsed by him in blank, were deposited with the Trust Company, and it also executed its orders to the number of 90, calling for the delivery to John C. Barnes or bearer or a designated amount of said $1,000,000 of stock in 10 per cent. installments. These orders were in the following form:

'To the Farmers' Loan and Trust Company: This is to certify that, for value received, Mr. John C. Barnes or bearer is entitled to have and receive _____ shares of the capital stock of the Chicago, Portage and Superior Rail- way Company, which stock has been fully paid for and placed in your keeping as a special trust for delivery upon this order, and you are hereby authorized and directed to accept or certify in the usual manner this order for the delivery of said stock, and to deliver to the bearer hereof _____ shares of the said stock whenever and as often as any two hundred and fifty thousand dollars of the first mortgage bonds of the said railway company are sold or disposed of by said railway company or by its fiscal agent, or whenever and as often as any ten miles of the railroad of said railway company shall be built, as will be certified to by the president of said railway company; and in any event you are hereby directed to deliver to the bearer, on the 1st day of January, A. D. 1883, any of the said _____ shares of capital stock then remaining undelivered upon a surrender of this order therefor. [Seal.] Chicago, Portage and Superior Railway Company. By ________, President.'

On the margin: 'This order for the delivery of the bonds and stock of this company held in special trust is hereby approved and accepted. The Farmers' Loan and Trust Company. [Seal.]'

These orders were all delivered to John C. Barnes in exchange for and redemption of all the theretofore outstanding stock of the Portage Company, which stock was at once canceled, with the exception of two certificates for $25,000, which, by oversight or design on the part of Charles J. Barnes, vice president of the Portage Company, remained in his custody uncanceled.

The situation after these arrangements were made was such that the entire outstanding stock was in the possession and control of C. J. Barnes, J. C. Barnes, and A. A. Jackson, yet held by them in trust for the company. The further stock provided for was to be issued from time to time to assist in the sale of the bonds, until enough of the latter had been disposed of to construct the road. These arrangements having been perfected, the Portage Company, through its president, sought the alliance and support of the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada, which had recently completed an extension of its road to Chicago.

Three contracts were entered into of dates June 16, 1881, July 10, 1881, and September 30, 1881, by which the bonds of the company were to be disposed of, and money enough advanced for the construction of the road. The bill sets out fully the nature and scope of these contracts, and copies of them are attached as exhibits. It is unnecessary here to say more than that by them, taken in connection with the prior arrangements of the Portage Company, the latter obtained satisfactory assurances of abundant funds, and was placed in a position to fully perform its agreement with the state, and construct the railroad by at least May 5, 1882; all this, of course, upon the condition of no outside and wrongful interference.

Relying upon the sufficiency of its arrangements for money, it, on August 18, 1881, entered into a contract with Horatio G. Angle for the construction of about 65 miles of its railway, being that portion covered by the land grant heretofore referred to. By the terms of that contract Angle was to receive $8,500 per mile in cash and $5,000 per mile in the full-paid stock of the company, on condition that he completed the road on or before May 5, 1882. It also contracted for steel rails and fastenings to be delivered as the work of construction proceeded.

Angle commenced work, and had made such progress that on the 20th of January, 1882, he had 1,600 men employed along the line, and it was an assured fact that, unless interfered with, he would complete the railway, according to the terms of the contract, on or before May 5, 1882.

The bill further charges that about this time the Omaha Company conspired with other parties to wrest from the Portage Company its land grant, and to that end to prevent the completion of the contract by Angle and the construction of the road.

In the carrying out of this conspiracy the conspirators bribed Charles J. Barnes and A. A. Jackson,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
286 cases
  • Kirby v. Union P. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Colorado
    • December 4, 1911
    ......Mosher v. St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co., 127 U.S. 390, 8 S.Ct. 1324, 32 L.Ed. 249; Eastman v. Railroad Co., 70 N.H. 240, 46 A. 54; Way v. Chicago, etc.,. Ry. Co., 64 Iowa 48, 19 N.W. 828, 52 Am.Rep. 431; Demilley v. T. & N. O. Ry. Co., 91 Tex. 215, 42 S.W. 540; Dangerfield v. Railway Co., 62 ...516] travel is made under color. of one of these tickets in the hands of any one other than. the original purchaser. Angle v. Chicago, St. P., M. & O. R. Co., 151 U.S. 1, 14 S.Ct. 240, 38 L.Ed. 55; Flaccus v. Smith,. supra; Raymond v. Yarrington, 96. [119 P. 1046] . ......
  • Noerr Motor Freight v. Eastern Railroad Pres. Conf.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • October 10, 1957
    ...defenses under consideration is well answered by the Supreme Court in the case of Angle v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co., 1894, 151 U.S. 1, 18, 19, 20, 14 S.Ct. 240, 247, 38 L.Ed. 52. In that case there was legislative grant to the Portage Company to construct a railroa......
  • Stoll v. Pacific Coast S.S. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington
    • April 28, 1913
    ......Brown, . 37 Wash. 97, 79 P. 635, 68 L.R.A. 889, 107 Am.St.Rep. 798;. Davidson v. New Orleans, 96 U.S. 97, 24 L.Ed. 616;. Chicago, etc., R.R. v. Chicago, 166 U.S. 226, 17. Sup.Ct. 581, 41 L.Ed. 979; Fayerweather v. Ritch, . 195 U.S. 276, 25 Sup.Ct. 58, 49 L.Ed. 193; Oregon ...416; [ 1 ] Thompson. v. N.P. Ry. Co., 8 Mont. 279, 21 P. 25; Atchison,. etc., Ry. Co. v. Baty, 6 Neb. 37, 29 Am.Rep. 356;. Angle v. Chicago, St. P., M. & O.R. Co., 151 U.S. 1,. 14 Sup.Ct. 240, 38 L.Ed. 55; 20 Am. & Eng. Enc. of Law (2d. Ed.) 54; Braydon v. Stewart (Eng.) 2 ......
  • Sunbeam Corp. v. Payless Drug Stores
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of California
    • May 15, 1953
    ...stemming from Lumley v. Gye, 2 E. & B. 216, and including, to cite but a few of the modern cases, Angle v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha R. Co., 151 U.S. 1, 14 S.Ct. 240, 38 L.Ed. 55; Bitterman v. Louisville & Nashville R. Co., 207 U.S. 205, 28 S.Ct. 91, 52 L.Ed. 171; Truax v. Raic......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • The Construction Industry in the U.S. Supreme Court:Part 2, Beyond Contract Law
    • United States
    • ABA General Library The Construction Lawyer No. 41-3, July 2021
    • July 1, 2021
    ...71 U.S. 657 (1866). 95. N. Transp. Co. v. City of Chicago, 99 U.S. 635 (1878). 96. Angle v. Chi., St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Ry. Co., 151 U.S. 1 (1894). 97. See, e.g. , Richards v. Wash. Terminal Co., 233 U.S. 546 (1914); Dainese v. Cooke, 91 U.S. 580 (1875). 98. E. River S.S. Corp. v. T......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT