Louisville Bagging Mfg. Co. v. Central Pass. Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 24 October 1893
• Citation: 23 S.W. 592,95 Ky. 50
• Parties: LOUISVILLE BAGGING MANUF'G CO. v. CENTRAL PASS. RY. CO.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

23 S.W. 592

95 Ky. 50

LOUISVILLE BAGGING MANUF'G CO. v. CENTRAL PASS. RY. CO.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

October 24, 1893

Appeal from Louisville law and equity court.

Bill by the Louisville Bagging Manufacturing Company for an injunction to restrain the Central Passenger Railway Company from opening an electric street railway. Bill dismissed, and complainant appeals. Affirmed.

Thos F. Hargis, for appellant.

Humphrey & Davie, for appellee.

LEWIS J.

The Louisville Bagging Manufacturing Company, a corporation brought this action for an injunction, which was temporarily granted, restraining the Central Passenger Railway Company, a corporation, and its officers, from constructing or operating an electric railway on Walnut street, between Nineteenth and Twentieth streets, in the city of Louisville, where plaintiff has a large building used for manufacturing bagging. H. R Thompson, judge of the Louisville city court, was also enjoined from proceeding, until termination of the action, to try J. J. Tap, president of plaintiff and others, upon warrants against them for cutting down and removing posts erected by the railroad company for use in operating its cars. The right to construct and operate by electricity the railway upon Walnut street, it appears, had been, before the action was commenced, granted to the company by resolution or ordinance of the general council of the city of Louisville duly passed, in pursuance of authority conferred by acts of the general assembly; and, as exercise of such delegated authority by municipal legislation has been often sanctioned and recognized by this court, the right so given to the Central Passenger Railway Company must be regarded as valid and effectual as if conferred directly by the general assembly. Moreover, as legislative power to authorize construction of a railway upon a public street, and operation of it by even steam, has been distinctly and often held by this court to exist, we see no reason to deny power to likewise authorize construction of such railway to be operated by electricity, for it is well settled that the use of a public street for travel and transportation by means of railway cars falls within the purposes for which streets are established and dedicated; and it is only when other ways of travel and transportation are prevented or unreasonably obstructed that courts can interfere to either enjoin or limit operation of railroads upon...