St. Louis & N. A. R. Co. v. Crandall

Decision Date15 April 1905
Citation86 S.W. 855
PartiesST. LOUIS & N. A. R. CO. v. CRANDALL.
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Boone County; John N. Tillman, Judge.

Action by one Crandall against the St. Louis & North Arkansas Railroad Company. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

The appellant railroad company was contemplating building from Eureka Springs east into Boone county, and the citizens of Harrison were seeking to induce it to build to that town. The railroad company required as a condition for so doing a certain cash bonus, the donation of right of way from the Boone county line, and stational grounds at Harrison. The officials of the railroad visited Harrison, and while they were there a public meeting was held to further the enterprise. The object was to secure subscriptions and donations to comply with the requirements of the railroad company. Crandall owned a tract of land near the town. He was absent the day of the meeting, and was sent for, and received in the meeting with cheers, to "encourage him to make his usual donation." The meeting had been discussing various station grounds, and, among others, a tract owned by Mrs. Josephine Murray, adjoining Crandall's land. Judge E. G. Mitchell was representing her in the matter, and stated that, if the depot was located on a 20-acre tract of hers, she would donate 10 acres and sell the other 10 for $1,000. Taking the evidence favorable to Crandall (although there was no serious conflicts in any of it), as the finding must be tested by the sufficiency of his evidence, the following was the course of events: Crandall stated that he did not want the depot on his land, but wanted it by him on the Murray land, and if the Murray tract was selected he would give $1,000 and the right of way through his own land. A committee was appointed to confer with the railroad officials, and Crandall conferred with them himself, and was given to understand that his proposition would be accepted, but for him to see Watkins, the president of the road. He then went to Mr. O. W. Watkins, the president of the road. Mr. Watkins was a leading lawyer of his part of the state, was raised in Boone county, and known well and favorably to all the parties connected with the transaction. Mr. Watkins told him (so Crandall testifies) that his proposition was accepted. Crandall, Murray, Judge Mitchell, and Mr. Watkins went to a law office to draw a contract. In the meantime Judge Mitchell had succeeded in getting Mr. Crandall to raise the amount to be paid Mrs. Murray to $1,100. Mr. Watkins dictated and Judge Mitchell wrote the contract, which was signed by Mrs. Murray and Crandall. This contract was lost, and its contents shown by parol, with the usual varying versions. Crandall made deed to the railroad company for the right of way through his land, reciting a consideration of $1. Mrs. Murray executed a deed for the 20 acres, reciting a consideration of $1,100, and it contained this clause: "This land is granted to said railroad company for railroad purposes and is to be used by said railroad company for the purpose of keeping and maintaining a railroad station on the same and to be used by it for other purposes connected with said railroad and the operation thereof, and for no other purposes." Crandall paid Mrs. Murray the $1,100, and when the railroad fulfilled its part of the contract with the people of Harrison and was built there within the time stipulated the deeds were delivered to Mr. Watkins. After the agreement referred to, 89 of the citizens entered into contract with the railroad company guarantying the fulfillment of its various requirements, including the furnishing of this right of way and stational facilities procured of Mrs. Murray and Crandall. The deeds of Mrs. Murray and Crandall were executed after the written agreement with the citizens, but the agreement dictated by Mr. Watkins, which was evidently only between Mrs. Murray and Crandall, so far as it was written, was made before the citizens' written agreement. Crandall erected various improvements on his property suitable to its then location close to the station. The railroad maintained the station it erected on the Murray land as a freight and passenger station for the town of Harrison for a year, and then erected a passenger station 500 yards distant, and abandoned the Murray depot as a passenger depot, and maintained it solely as a freight depot. No tickets were thereafter sold at the Murray depot, and no passenger trains stopped there. The Murray depot was not within the corporate limits. More than 50 citizens of Harrison signed a petition in conformity to section 6709, Kirby's Digest, to require the railroad to establish a stopping place convenient for the reception and handling freight, receiving and discharging passengers, etc. This was delivered to the president of the railroad. The town authorities did not take action contemplated by section 6710, but interested citizens raised the money necessary to defray the expenses of the railroad in establishing the new station. The new station is solely a passenger station, and freight is not received, handled, or discharged there. Crandall sued the railroad for damages by reason of removing the passenger station, and among the elements of damages claimed was the $1,100 paid Mrs....

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • St. Louis & North Arkansas Railroad Co. v. Crandell
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • April 15, 1905
  • Sims v. Best
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • November 3, 1919
    ...Co. v. Lane-White Lumber Co., 90 Ark. 426, 119 S. W. 822, and an illustration of the second is St. Louis & North Arkansas Railroad Co. v. Crandell, 75 Ark. 89, 86 S. W. 855, 112 Am. St. Rep. 42. A clear statement (and one much referred to) explaining the rule of permitting oral evidence to ......
  • Harper. v. The Va.n Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • October 19, 1915
    ...being void per se, an action for damages will lie at the suit of the grantor. 1 Elliott on Railroads, section 386; St. Louis & N. A. R. Co. v. Crandall, (Ark.) 86 S. W. 855; Whalen v. Baltimore & O. R. Co., (Md.) 69 Atl. 390. The cases cited and relied upon by appellant's counsel for their ......

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