Madera Waterworks v. City of Madera
| Decision Date | 28 April 1913 |
| Docket Number | No. 229,229 |
| Citation | 228 U.S. 454,33 S.Ct. 571,57 L.Ed. 915 |
| Parties | MADERA WATERWORKS, Appt., v. CITY OF MADERA et al |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. Frank H. Short, F. E. Cook, and E. J. McCutchen for appellant.
Messrs. Raleigh E. Rhodes and Marshall B. Woodworth for appellees.
This is a bill in equity to restrain the city of Madera from proceeding with the construction of a water plant in competition with one that the plaintiff and its predecessors have built under the Constitution of the state. The circuit court sustained a demurrer and dismissed the bill. 185 Fed. 281. The ground of the suit is that the state Constitution provides that in any city where there are no public works owned by the municipality for supplying the same with water, any individual or corporation of the state shall have the privilege of using the public streets and laying down pipes, etc., for the purpose, subject to the right of the municipal government to regulate the charges. Art. 11, § 19. It is argued that this provision, coupled with the duty imposed on the governing body to fix water rates annually, and the corresponding duty of the water company to comply with the regulations, both under severe penalties (art. 14, §§ 1, 2, act of March 7, 1881, §§ 1, 7, 8), imports a contract that the private person or corporation constructing works as invited shall not be subject to competition from the public source. Otherwise, it is pointed out, the same body will be called upon to regulate the plaintiff's charges and to endeavor to make a success of the city works. Furthermore, the plaintiff is forbidden by other provisions to divert its property to other uses, and, again, will be called on to pay taxes to help its rival to succeed. Thus, it is said, the city proposes to destroy the plaintiff's property, contrary to the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
But if, when the plaintiff built, the Constitution of the state authorized cities to built waterworks as well after works had been built there by private persons as before, the plaintiff took the risk of what might happen. An appeal to the 14th Amendment to protect property from a congenital defect must be vain. Abilene Nat. Bank v. Dolley, 228 U. S. 1, 5, 57 L. ed. ——, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 409. It is impossible not to feel the force of the plaintiff's argument as a reason for interpreting the Constitution so as to avoid the result, if it might be, but it comes too late. There is no pretense that there is any express promise to private adventurers that they shall not encounter...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Spahn v. Stewart
... ... Substantially ... the act provides that any city of the first class may ... establish an agency to investigate housing and ... Green v ... Frazier, supra; Madera Waterworks v. Madera, 228 ... U.S. 454, 33 S.Ct. 571, 57 L.Ed. 915; ... ...
-
Puget Sound Power Light Co v. City of Seattle, Wash 12 8212 15, 1934
...and compete with private interests engaged in a like activity, Standard Oil Co. v. City of Lincoln, supra; Madera Waterworks v. Madera, 228 U.S. 454, 33 S.Ct. 571, 57 L.Ed. 915; Helena Water Works Co. v. Helena, 195 U.S. 383, 25 S.Ct. 40, 49 L.Ed. We need not stop to inquire whether the equ......
-
Nebbia v. People of State of New York, 531
...Executor, 1 Black, 603, 17 L.Ed. 191; Crowley v. Christensen, 137 U.S. 86, 11 S.Ct. 13, 34 L.Ed. 620. 35 Madera Waterworks Co. v. Madera, 228 U.S. 454, 33 S.Ct. 571, 57 L.Ed. 915; Jones v. City of Portland, 245 U.S. 217, 38 S.Ct. 112, 62 L.Ed. 252, L.R.A. 1918C, 765, Ann. Cas. 1918E, 660; G......
-
Illinois Power & Light Corp. v. City of Centralia, Ill.
...43, 48 L. Ed. 127; Skaneateles Waterworks Co. v. Skaneateles, 184 U. S. 354, 22 S. Ct. 400, 46 L. Ed. 585; Madera Water Works v. Madera, 228 U. S. 454, 33 S. Ct. 571, 57 L. Ed. 915. But the situation here goes far beyond that just mentioned, for it is complained that the competition which w......
-
A historical, economic, and legal analysis of municipal ownership of the information highway.
...by establishing municipal utilities and simultaneously taxing and competing with incumbent providers. See Madera Waterworks v. Madera, 228 U.S. 454, 456 (1913) (holding that the property of a private waterworks company is not taken without due process of law by the municipality constructing......