Knobloch v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company
| Decision Date | 14 January 1884 |
| Citation | 18 N.W. 106,31 Minn. 402 |
| Parties | Eleonora Knobloch v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the municipal court of St Paul, in an action for negligently running over and killing the plaintiff's cow at the crossing of Grace street within the limits of that city. The alleged negligence consisted in running the train by which the cow was struck at a speed of more than 15 miles an hour, in violation of the city ordinance quoted in the opinion, and the only question on this appeal was as to the validity of the ordinance.
Judgment affirmed.
Bigelow Flandrau & Squires, for appellant, cited Meyers v. Chicago, R. I. & Pac. R. Co., 7 Am. & Eng. R. Cas. 406, and cases cited.
Hermon W. Phillips and Warren H. Mead, for respondent, cited Fritz v. First Div., etc., R. Co., 22 Minn. 404; Shaber v. St. Paul, M. & M. Ry. Co., 28 Minn. 103; Kelly v. St. Paul, M. & M. Ry. Co., 29 Minn. 1; Faber v. St. Paul, M. & M. Ry. Co., Id. 465.
The only question presented by the appellant on this appeal is as to the validity of an ordinance of the city of St. Paul, as follows: "That no railroad company or corporation, or their agents or employes, shall run a locomotive or train of cars, or single car, within the limits of the city of St. Paul, at a greater speed than four miles per hour," etc. It is claimed that this is in restraint of commerce, and is therefore unreasonable and void. The facts relied on by appellant to show this, as affecting its line in question, (its short line between St. Paul and Minneapolis,) are: the length of the line is ten miles, of which between three and four miles is within the limits of the city of Minneapolis, (an ordinance of which restricts the speed to six miles an hour,) and three or four miles is within the city of St. Paul, leaving a space of country between the two cities of about three miles; that the running time between the ends of the line in the two cities is 30 minutes, or 20 miles an hour, and that citizens of each city are constantly applying to appellant to reduce the running time; that observance of the ordinances would increase it to more than one and one-half hours; that about 2,400 tons of freight pass over the line daily, and nearly half a million passengers passed over it in the year 1882; that, although the crossing where respondent's cow was killed is within the platted portion of the city, the surrounding country is similar to the open country out of the city, and the street similar to a common country road, there being no graded streets within three-quarters of a mile, and no house within a quarter of a mile, in the direction of the built-up portion of the city. The street seems to have been a good deal travelled.
We do not question the power of the courts to declare an ordinance of a municipal corporation void as in restraint of trade. The mere fact, however, that it operates to restrain trade will not justify such action;...
To continue reading
Request your trial