International & G. N. Ry. Co. v. Anderson County

Citation174 S.W. 305
Decision Date22 January 1915
Docket Number(No. 1351.)
PartiesINTERNATIONAL & G. N. RY. CO. v. ANDERSON COUNTY et al.<SMALL><SUP>†</SUP></SMALL>
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

Appeal from District Court, Cherokee County; A. E. Davis, Judge.

Action by Anderson County and others against the International & Great Northern Railway Company. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

See, also, 156 S. W. 499.

The appellees, the county of Anderson, the city of Palestine, and certain citizens suing for themselves and in behalf of all other like interested and situated members of the public in the city of Palestine, brought this suit in the district court of Anderson county, Tex., against the appellant company. Properly construing the appellees' petition in the light of the facts therein set out and in accordance with the relief asked by the prayer, the suit is in the nature of the prevention of the continuance of an illegal act upon appellant's part in violation of applicatory legislative provisions of the state to railway companies in respect to location and maintenance of general offices, machine shops, and roundhouses, working injury especially to appellees without remedy at law, and seeking to interrupt the continuance of such wrongful violation of the statutes governing appellant by equitable interference at the hands of the court. Under the facts given in the petition the prayer was for a decree "enforcing the public duty of defendant to forever keep and maintain its general offices, machine shops, and roundhouses in the city of Palestine" and "for a mandatory injunction commanding the defendant to at once desist and refrain from keeping or maintaining any other general offices in connection with the operation of said railroad at any other place than the city of Palestine, and commanding and requiring the defendant to keep and maintain all of the general offices for the operation of said railroad at the city of Palestine." Statement of such pleading is fully made in the former appeal in 156 S. W. 499, which is here adopted and can be referred to. The appellant seasonably filed a plea of privilege of trial in the district court of Harris county, Tex., which was overruled, and the venue then was, on motion, changed to Cherokee county. Appellant pleaded to the jurisdiction of the district court of the state to hear and determine the controversy, averring to the effect that if any claim or liability in the matter pleaded existed in favor of the plaintiffs, decree of foreclosure in the United States Court for the Northern District of Texas had reserved jurisdiction to try and determine same, and had exclusive jurisdiction thereof. As the matters averred in that respect fully appear in the record without dispute, it is deemed unnecessary to repeat them here. Besides demurrer and special exceptions to the petition, and denials as to the merits of the controversy, the appellant pleaded statutes of limitation of two and four years, and the statute of frauds, in bar of the action. Appellant further specially seasonably interposed by proper pleas defenses as federal questions founded upon the Constitution of the United States, which later on will be specifically adverted to. A trial to a jury resulted in special findings of fact affirming the existence of the material facts pleaded by appellees. On these findings a decree was entered in accordance with the prayer of the appellees' petition, perpetually enjoining and restraining the appellant company from changing the location of the machine shops and roundhouses from Palestine, and from keeping and maintaining general offices at any other place than Palestine, Tex.

In deference to the findings of the jury, as having support in evidence, we find that on or about the 15th day of March, 1872, the Houston & Great Northern Railroad Company, acting by its president, contracted and agreed with the citizens of Palestine, acting by John H. Reagan, to extend its line of railroad to intersect the International Railroad at Palestine, to establish a depot within a half mile of the courthouse at Palestine, to commence running cars regularly thereto by July, 1873, and to thereupon locate and forever maintain the general offices, machine shops, and roundhouses of the Houston & Great Northern Railroad at the city of Palestine, for and in consideration of an agreement by John H. Reagan to make a thorough canvass of Anderson county to induce the electors of that county to authorize the issuance of interest-bearing bonds of the county in the principal sum of $150,000, and upon the further consideration that Anderson county, on authorization of its electors, should issue and deliver its bonds in the principal sum aforesaid. John H. Reagan made a thorough canvass of Anderson county to induce the electors to vote the bonds, and Anderson county, on authorization of its electors, issued and delivered to the Houston & Great Northern Railroad Company its interest-bearing bonds in the principal sum of $150,000 within a year from the date of the contract and agreement mentioned above. Proceedings in respect to the ordering and issuance of the bonds are in the record for reference. In part performance of and in compliance with the contract and agreement mentioned, the machine shops and roundhouses of the Houston & Great Northern Railroad and of the International & Great Northern Railroad were established at Palestine on or about July, 1873, and thereafter maintained at that place. There is evidence to support the finding that the Houston & Great Northern Railroad Company and the International & Great Northern Railroad Company in point of fact authorized and ratified the action of Galusha A. Grow in making the contract and agreement so made. About the first of the year 1875 the International & Great Northern Railroad Company, acting by its general superintendent, H. M. Hoxie, contracted and agreed with the citizens of the city of Palestine, among whom were the appellees George A. Wright and J.

W. Ozment, to fully and completely perform the previous contract and agreement between the Houston & Great Northern Railroad Company, acting by Galusha A. Grow, and the citizens of Palestine, acting by John H. Reagan, by at once locating the general offices of the International & Great Northern Railroad at Palestine and by thereafter permanently keeping and maintaining the general offices, machine shops, and roundhouses of the International & Great Northern Railroad at Palestine, for and in consideration of certain bonds of Anderson county theretofore issued to the Houston & Great Northern Railroad Company, and for the further and additional consideration that said citizens should at once construct and complete, or cause to be constructed and completed, at their own cost and expense, any and all houses at Palestine, Tex., which might be demanded by said company, in accordance with such plans or directions as might be furnished by the company through its officers, for occupancy at reasonable rentals by employés of said company and their families, and especially by general officers, their families and clerks. The citizens of Palestine within 12 months from the date of the agreement caused to be constructed and completed, at their own cost and expense, certain houses at Palestine, which were all the houses demanded by the International & Great Northern Railroad Company, in accordance with the plans and directions furnished therefor by the company through an officer of same, for occupancy at reasonable rentals by employés of the company and general officers thereof, their families and clerks. There is evidence to support the finding that in point of fact the International & Great Northern Railroad Company authorized and ratified the action of H. M. Hoxie in making the contract and agreement of date early in 1875 mentioned. The jury made a negative answer to a special question as to whether, in the event the appellant should be required to keep and maintain its shops in Palestine permanently, any burden or injurious effect in point of fact would thereby be placed upon or suffered by interstate commerce.

It was further proven that the Houston & Great Northern Railroad Company was chartered by legislative act of date October 26, 1866, set out in the record, and that the International Railroad Company was chartered by legislative act of date August 5, 1870, set out in the record. It was proven that written articles of agreement were entered into February 19, 1872, between the International Railroad Company and the Houston & Great Northern Railroad Company, whereby the two companies agreed "to unite, merge and consolidate their several properties and franchises." The stockholders jointly of both companies ratified this agreement on September 23, 1873. At a meeting of the stockholders of the International & Great Northern Railroad Company, the consolidated company, held September 24 and 27, 1873, by-laws were adopted and put in force. By special act of the Legislature in evidence, of date April 24, 1873, the International & Great Northern Railroad Company was authorized to issue bonds and to secure same by mortgage on its road, and, besides other things, provided:

"All acts heretofore done in the name of either of said companies shall be of the same binding force and effect upon the said International & Great Northern Railroad Company that they were upon the respective companies."

A further special act of the Legislature is in evidence, of date March 10, 1875 (Sp. Acts 14th Leg. c. 49) entitled:

"An act for the relief of the International Railroad Company, now consolidated with the Houston & Great Northern Railroad Company under the name of the International & Great Northern Railroad Company."

A complete merger and amalgamation in fact of the two companies into the new company under the name of the International & Great Northern Railroad Company was proven. On April 5,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Dilger v. School Dist. 24 CJ
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • 25 Mayo 1960
    ...which must be stricken is a penalty provision. This may be illustrated by reference to two cases. In International & G. N. Ry. Co. v. Anderson County, Tex.Civ.App., 174 S.W. 305, affirmed, 1915, 246 U.S. 424, 38 S.Ct. 370, 62 L.Ed. 807, a statute was attacked on the ground that it imposed e......
  • Fry v. Tucker
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • 23 Abril 1947
    ...with plaintiff to receive as a contingent fee one-half of the amount recovered by plaintiff); International & G. N. Ry. Co. v. Anderson County, Tex.Civ.App., 174 S.W. 305, 327-329 (a suit by nine citizens of Palestine for themselves and all other citizens of the city); Texas Farm Bureau Cot......
  • Houston & T. C. R. Co. v. City of Ennis
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 2 Febrero 1918
    ...Ann. Cas. 911; Railway Co. v. Anderson County, 150 S. W. 239; Railway Co. v. Anderson County, 106 Tex. 60, 156 S. W. 499; Railway Co. v. Anderson County, 174 S. W. 305; Mosel v. Railway Co., 177 S. W. 1048; Joy v. St. Louis, 138 U. S. 1, 11 Sup. Ct. 243, 34 L. Ed. 843; Railway Co. v. D. & R......
  • Hidalgo County Water Control and Imp. Dist. No. 1 v. Boysen
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 7 Febrero 1962
    ...117 Tex. 218, 300 S.W. 44; and though an unnamed relative is a member of a class in a class action. International & G. N. Ry. Co. v. Anderson County, Tex.Civ.App., 174 S.W. 305, 327-329. In applying the rule of disqualification for a relative's interest we should endeavor to follow the spir......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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