William Searight, Commissioner and Superintendent of the Cumberland Road, Within the State of Pennsylvania, Plaintiff In Error v. William Stokes and Lucius Stockton, Who Have Survived Richard Stockton, Defendants In Error
| Citation | 11 L.Ed. 537,44 U.S. 151,3 How. 151 |
| Parties | WILLIAM SEARIGHT, COMMISSIONER AND SUPERINTENDENT OF THE CUMBERLAND ROAD, WITHIN THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. WILLIAM B. STOKES AND LUCIUS W. STOCKTON, WHO HAVE SURVIVED RICHARD C. STOCKTON, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR |
| Decision Date | 01 January 1845 |
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
THIS case was brought up by writ of error from the Circuit Court of the United States for the western district of Pennsylvania, and involved the right of the plaintiff in error, acting under the authority of the state of Pennsylvania, to collect tolls from the stage-coaches which carried the mail of the United States.
The circumstances under which the question arose were these:
On the 30th of April, 1802, and 3d of March, 1803, acts of Congress were passed, the effect of both of which taken together was, that three per cent. of the amount received for the sales of public land in Ohio, should be expended in making roads within the said state, and two per cent. of said fund be also expended in making public roads leading from the navigable waters emptying into the Atlantic to the Ohio river, upon certain conditions, which were accepted by Ohio.
On the 29th of March, 1806, Congress passed an act to provide for laying out the road by commissioners, and directed the President to pursue such measures as in his opinion should be proper to obtain the consent for making the road, of the state or states through which the same may have been laid out; the expense of the road to be charged to the two per cent. fund.
Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Maryland all gave their assent. Pennsylvania passed her law on the 9th of April, 1807, and gave power to those who were to make the road to enter upon land, dig, cut, and carry away materials, &c. The road was laid out from Cumberland, in Maryland, to Wheeling, on the Ohio river, and made; but a great difficulty having arisen, on the part of the United States, in keeping it in repair, the road fell into decay, and a new system of legislation was adopted to attain this object.
On the 4th of February, 1831, the state of Ohio passed a law for the preservation and repair of the United States road. It provided, that whenever the consent of Congress should be obtained, the governor of the state should take the road under his care, erect gates and toll-houses, appoint a superintendent, collectors of tolls, &c., with this proviso amongst others: 'Provided, also, That no toll shall be received or collected for the passage of any stage or coach conveying the United States mail, or horses bearing the same, or any wagon or carriage laden with the property of the United States, or any cavalry or other troops, arms, or military stores belonging to the same, or to any of the states comprising this union, or any person or persons on duty in the military service of the United States or of the militia of any of the states.'
The law contained the necessary provisions for the preservation of good order upon the road, and also a stipulation that the tolls should be neither below nor above a sum necessary to defray the expenses incident to the preservation and repair of the same.
On the 2d of March, 1831, Congress assented to this act.
On the 4th of April, 1831, Pennsylvania passed an act 'for the preservation and repair of the Cumberland road.' It provided for the appointment of commissioners, who were directed to build toll-houses and erect toll-gates, to collect tolls, with the following exceptions: 'And provided, also, That nothing in this act shall be construed so as to authorize any tolls to be received or collected from any person or persons passing or repassing from one part of his farm to another, or to or from a mill, or to or from any place of public worship, funeral, militia training, elections, or from any student or child going to or from any school or seminary of learning, or from persons and witnesses going to and returning from courts: and provided, further, that no toll shall be received or collected for the passage of any wagon or carriage laden with the property of the United States, or any cannon or military stores belonging to the United States or to any of the states composing this union.'
The 4th section directed the amount of tolls, after deducting expenses, to be applied to the repairs and preservation of the road, and gave the commissioners power to increase or diminish the rates of tolls, provided that they should at no time be increased beyond the rates of toll established by an act incorporating a company to make a road from Harrisburg to Pittsburg, passed in 1806. The toll fixed by this act upon a coach and four horses was twenty cents for every five miles.
The 10th section was as follows:
On the 23d of January, 1832, Maryland passed an act, which, in its essential provisions, was the same with that of Pennsylvania; and on the 7th of February, 1832, Virginia passed a similar law.
On the 3d of July, 1832, Congress declared its assent to the above mentioned laws of Pennsylvania and Maryland in these words, 'to which acts the assent of the United States is hereby given, to remain in force during the pleasure of Congress,' and appropriated $150,000 to carry into effect the provisions of said acts; and on the 2d of March, 1833, assented to the act of Virginia, with a similar limitation.
On the 24th of June, 1834, Congress passed an act for the continuation and repair of the Cumberland road, appropriating $300,000 to that object.
The 4th section was as follows: 'And be it further enacted, That as soon as the sum by this act appropriated, or so much thereof as is necessary, shall be expended in the repair of said road, agreeably to the provisions of this act, the same shall be surrendered to the states respectively through which said road passes; and the United States shall not thereafter be subject to any expense for repairing said road.'
On the 1st of April, 1835, Pennsylvania passed a supplement to the act above mentioned, accepting the surrender by the United States, &c., &c.
On the 13th of June, 1836, Pennsylvania passed another act 'relating to the tolls on that part of the Cumberland road which passes through Pennsylvania, and for other purposes,' the 1st section of which was as follows: 'That all wagons, carriages, or other modes of conveyance, passing upon that part of the Cumberland road which passes through Pennsylvania, carrying goods, cannon, or military stores belonging to the United States, or to any individual state of the union, which are excepted from the payment of toll by the 2d section of an act passed the fourth of April, anno Domini eighteen hundred and thirty-one, shall extend only so far as to relieve such wagons, carriages, and other modes of conveyance from the payment of toll to the proportional amount of such goods so carried belonging to the United States or to any of the individual states of the union; and that in all cases of wagons, carriages, stages, or other modes of conveyance, carrying the United States' mail, with passengers or goods, such wagon, stage, or other mode of conveyance, shall pay half toll upon such modes of conveyance.'
On the 5th of April, 1843, another act was passed by Pennsylvania the 39th section of which was as follows: 'That from and after the passage of this act, the commissioner of the Cumberland road shall have power to increase the rate of tolls on all stage-coaches drawn by four or more horses, to any sum not exceeding one dollar, at each gate upon said road within the state of Pennsylvania; and the said commissioner shall have the same power to enforce the payment and collection of tolls authorized by the act of thirteenth of June, eighteen hundred and thirty-six, relating to tolls on that part of the Cumberland road passing through Pennsylvania, by stopping such coach or coaches, as is provided by the act of fourth of April, eighteen hundred and thirty-one, for the preservation and repair of the Cumberland road; and to exercise all the means and remedies authorized by said acts for the collection of tolls and prevention of fraud on said road; reserving also to the said commissioner the right to sue or maintain any action therefor, as he might or could do at common law, in addition to the remedies herein provided.'
A suit was brought on the 29th November, 1842, in the Circuit Court of the United States for the western district of Pennsylvania, by agreement of parties, and a statement of facts, signed by the respective counsel, in the nature of a special verdict, as follows:
'It is agreed that this case be submitted to the court on the following statement of facts, as if found by a jury.
'The plaintiff is the commissioner and superintendent of so much of the Cumberland or National road as lies within the state of Pennsylvania, duly appointed under and by virtue of the laws of that state in such case provided, and is a citizen of said state. The defendants and Richard C. Stockton, whom they...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cunningham v. Potts
...United States v. Perkins, 163 U. S. 625, 16 S. Ct. 1073, 41 L. Ed. 287; Achison v. Huddleson, 12 How. 293, 13 L. Ed. 993; Searight v. Stokes, 3 How. 151, 11 L. Ed. 537; State ex rel. Hines v. Scott County Road Co., 207 Mo. 54, 105 S. W. 752, 13 Ann. Cas. 656; St. Louis v. Green, 7 Mo. App. ......
-
Cosgriff v. Tri-State Telephone And Telegraph Company, a Corporation
...107 N.W. 525 15 N.D. 210 M. A. COSGRIFF, WILLIAM WHITEMORE, SARAH BUSSEE, JAMES MCSHERRY AND FRANK ... lines over post routes, have no application to telephone ... lines. City of ... Searight v ... Stokes, 3 How. 151, 11 L.Ed. 537; Luxton ... Com., 3 A ... 825; P. T. & T. Co. v. Road, 49 A. 284; C. & P ... T. Co. v. B. and O. Co., ... within the purpose of the grant of the easement, and ... ...
-
Buck v. Kuykendall
...Cable Co. v. Chicopee, 207 Mass. 341, 350, 93 N.E. 927, 32 L.R.A. (N.S.) 997; Dickey v. Turnpike Co., 7 Dana (Ky.) 113; Searight v. Stokes, 3 How. 151, 11 L.Ed. 537; Price v. Pennsylvania R.R., 113 U.S. 221, 5 427, 28 L.Ed. 980; St. Louis v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 148 U.S. 92, 13 Sup.......
-
State ex rel. Goshen Irrigation District v. Hunt, Secretary of State
... ... J. 381; ... Reed v. Commissioner, 34 F.2d 263; Johnson v ... Maryland, 254 ... property and that plaintiff was created for a public purpose ... and ... relator obtained water for the lands within it under annual ... rental contracts made with ... , also, that the same word or phrase may have ... different meanings as it is controlled by ... municipal corporations, such as road districts and school ... districts, are ... Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 240 U.S. 319, 36 S.Ct ... 298, 60 L.Ed. 664, ... court considering the earlier cases of Searight ... v. Stokes, 44 U.S. 151, 3 HOW 151, 11 L.Ed ... ...
-
Desperately ducking slavery: Dred Scott and contemporary constitutional theory.
...as opposed to the Marshall Court's interpretation of "necessary." See Swisher, Taney at 194-97 (cited in note 3); Searight v. Stokes, 44 U.S. 151, 180-81 (1845) (Daniel, J., dissenting). See also, Merrill D. Peterson, The Great Triumvirate: Webster, Clay, and Calhoun 306 (Oxford U. Press, 1......