Louisville Co v. Commonwealth of Kentucky
Citation | 40 L.Ed. 849,16 S.Ct. 714,161 U.S. 677 |
Decision Date | 30 March 1896 |
Docket Number | No. 722,722 |
Parties | LOUISVILLE & N. R. CO. v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY et al |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
[Syllabus from pages 677-679 intentionally omitted] This was a bill in equity, styled a 'petition,' originally filed by the commonwealth of Kentucky against the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company '), the Chesapeake, Ohio & Southwestern Railroad Company (hereinafter called the 'Chesapeake Co.'), and several subordinate corporations tributary to the latter, to enjoin the L. & N. Co. (1) from acquiring the control of, or operating, the parallel and competing lines of railroad known as the 'Chesapeake, Ohio & Southwestern System'; (2) from acquiring or operating the Short Route Railway Transfer Company, a belt line in Louisville, and the Union Depot in Louisville, connected therewith; and also (3) to enjoin the Chesapeake, Ohio & Southwestern System from selling out to, or permitting its roads to be operated by, its competitor, the L. & N. Co.
It was stated substantially in the commonwealth's petition, as its cause of action, that the L. & N. Co. owned and controlled many railroads in Kentucky, as respects which, railroads owned or controlled by the other companies named are parallel and competing; that defendants have made a contract and arrangement whereby the L. & N. Co. is to become the owner, and acquire a control of, the capital stock, franchises, and property of the other defendant companies, to the great injury of the commonwealth, and in violation of section 201 of the state constitution of 1891, which reads as follows:
In an amended petition, it was stated, in substance, that the L. & N. Co. was endeavoring to acquire the capital stock, interest in real property and mortgage securities of the other defendant companies, in order to obtain control, and ultimately purchase at judicial sale, and become the owner of, their franchises and property.
The answer denied the allegation in the form as made, but contained an affirmative statement that the purchase of the stock and securities referred to had already been consummated, and, in effect, admitted that the L. & L. Co. intended to purchase the franchises and properties at judicial sale.
The L. & N. Co. was incorporated by an act of the Kentucky legislature approved March 5, 1850, the fourteenth section of which act provided 'that the president and board of directors of said company are hereby vested with all powers and rights necessary to the construction of a railroad from the city of Louisville to the Tennessee line in the direction of Nashville, the route to be by them selected and determined, not exceeding sixty-six feet wide, with as many sets of tracks as they may deem necessary; and that they may cause to be made contracts with others for making said railroad or any part of it.'
This act was frequently amended in details unnecessary to be noticed here, one of which, adopted March 7, 1854, declared (section 4) 'that it shall be lawful for said Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company to unite their road with any other road connecting therewith upon such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon between the said Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company and such other company as they may desire to unite their said road with.'
On December 15, 1855, the legislature of Tennessee passed an act to amend an act entitled 'An act to charter the Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company, and the several acts amending said act passed by the legislatures of Kentucky and Tennessee,' under which it had been authorized to construct its road in Tennessee from the Kentucky line to Nashville, the thirteenth section of which act provided as follows:
On January 17, 1856, the legislature of Kentucky passed an act, the first section of which re-enacted the act passed by the legislature of Tennessee in 1855 'in the following sections and words: [Here follows a literal copy of the Tennessee act.]' The second section of this act vested the Louisville & Nashville Company with power to make agreements a railroad in part or in whole of the distance a railroad in part or in whole of th edistruct between Louisville and Memphis, and running in the direction of Louisville, whereby to secure mutual and reciprocal rights to the contracting parties, etc. The third section was as follows: 'That the said company may, under the provisions of the thirteenth section of this act [referring evidently to the thirteenth section of the Tennessee act], from time to time extend any branch road and may purchase and hold any road constructed by another compnay,
or may agree on terms to receive the cars of other roads on their said road, but shall charge for the same the usual freight.'
At the same session, and on February 14, 1856, the legislature of Kentucky passed what is known as the 'General Reservation Act,' the language of which, so far as it is material here, is as follows:
* * *'
At this time and up to September, 1856, the L. & N. Co. owned only a short piece of road, 31 miles in length, extending from Louisville, southwardly, to Lebanon Junction. Up to September, 1857, it owned only 45 miles; to September, 1858, 72 miles; in 1859, only 110 miles; and not till 1860 did it carry its road to Nashville, 180 miles. About the same time was constructed a branch road from a point about 7 miles south of Bowling Green to the state line, which has since been extended, and is now owned and operated by it, to Memphis, Tenn. Subsequently it purchased, and now owns, a road known as the 'Evansville, Henderson & Nashville Railroad,' which extends from Edgefield, Tenn., on its main line, 10 miles north of Nashville, by way of Hopkinsville, Ky., to Henderson, and thence across the Ohio river, to Evansville, Ind. It also owns and operates various branches in the state of Kentucky that diverge from the main line eastwardly, as well as the Kentucky Central Railroad, extending from Cincinnati southward, and certain branches thereof.
Of the roads constituting the Chesapeake, Ohio & Southwestern System, the first one extended from Paducah to Elizabethtown, and was subsequently extended from Cecilia Junction, six miles from Elizabethtown, to Louisville, whereby a continuous line was formed from Louisville to Paducah, independent of the L. & N. road. But by a subsequent lease, amounting practically to a purchase of a road from Paducah to Memphis, the Chesapeake Co. became, about 1881, the owner of a connected, continuous, and independent railroad from Louisville, by way of Cecilia Junction and Paducah, to Memphis. It also has an interest in and control of several other railroads, bearing the name of, and nominally held by, the companies that built them, one of which is termed the 'Short Route Railway,' extending from Preston street, in Louisville, through the depot at Seventh and Water streets, to Twelfth street, where it connects with the main line.
Upon a hearing of the case upon pleadings and proofs, a decree was entered by the Jefferson circuit court in favor of the commonwealth, enjoining the proposed agreement for consolidation, which decree was...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Louisville & N.R. Co. v. Central Stockyards Co.
... 97 S.W. 778 133 Ky. 148 LOUISVILLE & N. R. CO. v. CENTRAL STOCKYARDS CO. Court of Appeals of Kentucky. November 15, 1906 ... Dissenting ... Opinion, Nov. 20, 1906 ... Barker, ... J., dissenting ... may, upon a proper showing of their recalcitrancy, be ... compelled by the courts to do so. As said by this court in ... Commonwealth v. L. & N. R. R. Co., 85 S.W. 712, 27 ... Ky. Law Rep. 497: "Railroads are creatures of the law, ... invested with certain powers to promote the ... ...
-
Shepard v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co.
... ... 557, 573, 7 Sup.Ct. 4, 30 L.Ed. 244; ... Covington, etc., Bridge Co. v. Kentucky, 154 U.S ... 204, 211, 212, 216, 217, 222, 14 Sup.Ct. 1087, 38 L.Ed. 962; ... Houston & T.C.R ... enforce such a law for the same reason ... [184 F. 771] ... Louisville ... & Nashville R. Co. v. Eubank, 184 U.S. 27, 42, 43, 22 ... Sup.Ct. 277, 46 L.Ed. 416 ... ...
-
George Simpson v. David Shepard No 291 George Simpson v. Emma Kennedy No 292 George Simpson v. William Shillaber No 293
...v. Great Northern R. Co. 161 U. S. 646, 677, 40 L. Ed. 838, 848, 16 Sup. Ct. Rep. 705; Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Kentucky, 161 U. S. 677, 701, 702, 40 L. ed. 849, 859, 860, 16 Sup. Ct. Rep. 714. See Northern Securities Co. v. United States, 193 U. S. 317, 348, 382, 48 L. ed. 692, 704, 718, ......
-
Anglo-American Land, Mortgage & Agency Co. v. Lombard
... ... 55, 46 L.Ed. 113; ... Mercantile Trust Co. v. Wood, 8 C.C.A. 658, 60 F ... 346; Kentucky, etc., Co. v. Hamilton, 11 C.C.A. 42, ... 63 F. 93; Minchen v. Hart, 18 C.C.A. 570, 72 F. 294; ... invalid as if beyond the corporate powers of both ... Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Kentucky, 161 ... U.S. 677, 692, 16 Sup.Ct. 714, 40 L.Ed. 849 ... ...