Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Railway Co. v. Alling
Ry. Co. v. Alling, 99 U.S. 463 (Supreme Court of the United States 1879)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1879-04-21
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- Construction of Sec. 2 of the 1875 Right-of-Way Act
- “Denver & Rio Grande Ry.”
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Railway Co. v. Alling. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 60 opinions
Headnotes
- Civil Procedure — Corporate Litigation — Authority of Directors to Control Appeals Where a corporation's board of directors or trustees, charged by law with managing the corporation's property and affairs, directs that pending appeals be prosecuted to final judgment, a court will not, on the suggestion of strangers to the decrees appealed from, go behind the official action of the board and dismiss the appeals over the board's objection; if the directors violate a trust or binding agreement in prosecuting the appeals, the remedy lies in a court of original jurisdiction upon proper pleadings.
- Environmental Law — Railroad Right of Way — Nature of the Grant A congressional grant of a right of way over the public domain confers a present beneficial easement capable of enjoyment only when the granted way is actually located and appropriated in good faith for the purposes contemplated by the company's charter and the act of Congress; upon such location and appropriation, the previously imperfect title acquires precision and by relation takes effect as of the date of the grant.
- Environmental Law — Railroad Right of Way — Preliminary Surveys A preliminary survey of a portion of a designated railroad route, without more, is not equivalent to a fixed location of the road and an appropriation of the granted right of way, where a similar survey of another part of the general route would not constitute an appropriation; the grant of a right of way over the entire designated route is an entirety, and a mere preliminary survey of a particular segment is not an appropriation of the way granted as to that segment.
- Environmental Law — Railroad Right of Way — Appropriation by Occupancy A railroad company's preliminary surveys, followed by actual occupancy of a pass for the purpose of constructing its road through it in advance of a competing company, constitute a final appropriation of the right of way granted by Congress, and the company is entitled to have secured against all intruders the privileges and advantages belonging to that position.
- Environmental Law — Railroad Right of Way — Shared Use of Canons and Defiles Under the act of March 3, 1875, a railroad company whose right of way or track passes through any canon, pass, or defile may not prevent any other duly organized railroad company from using and occupying that canon, pass, or defile for its road in common with the road first located, and a company holding a subsisting but unlocated grant of a right of way through such a defile is subject to that provision.
- Business & Corporate Law — Railroad Organization — Disregarding Corporate Form A railroad company duly organized under state law is embraced by the terms of the act of March 3, 1875, and courts may not go behind its regular and lawful organization to exclude it from the rights granted by that act merely because it derives assistance from or accepts aid from another corporation with which it chooses to share the benefits secured under the act.
- Environmental Law — Railroad Right of Way — Effect of Accepting Extension of Time A railroad company that accepts the benefit of an extension of time within which to complete its road, upon which extension its right to take possession of a pass and prepare for the final location and construction of its road depends, must be held to have assented to the provisions of the act of March 3, 1875, permitting any other duly organized railroad company to use and occupy the canon or defile for its road in common with the road first located.
- Environmental Law — Railroad Right of Way — Relative Rights of Competing Companies Where one company has acquired the prior right to a defile, it is entitled to construct its road thereunobstructed, and where the defile is broad enough for both companies to proceed without interference each must be allowed to do so; in narrow portions where simultaneous construction is impracticable, the court should by proper orders recognize the prior right of the first company to construct its road, and where only one road-bed and track can be laid, the court should, on just and equitable terms, establish and secure the statutory right of the other company to use the same road-bed and track in common after completion.
after stating the case, delivered the opinion of the court,
A preliminary question, presented for our consideration, must be first disposed of.
These causes were determined in the Circuit Court, by final decree, Aug. 24, 1878. Upon stipulation between the parties they were submitted here on the 10th of January last. On the 20th of January it was represented to this court, in proper form, that the Pueblo and Arkansas Valley Railroad Company owned a railroad which, with its branches and extensions, is a continuation, in Colorado, of the line of the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fé Railroad Company in Kansas; that certain contracts and arrangements had, with the consent of the appellees in both suits, and after the filing of that stipulation, been entered into between the Denver Company, the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fé Railroad Company, and the Pueblo and Arkansas Valley Railroad Company, ana had been in part executed after the filing of the printed arguments herein : that by said contracts and arrangements the Atchison, Topeka, and Sante Fé Railroad Company had taken a lease of all the constructed lines of the Denver Company for thirty years from Dec. 1, 1878, and was then in the possession of and operating them; had purchased and received all the railroad supplies and materials of that company ; had purchased and transferred to a trustee for its use a majority of all the shares, of the capital-stock of that company, with an agreement providing for a further purchase and ownership of the remainder of them, and with the further agreement that the Pueblo and Arkansas Valley Railroad Company and the Atchison, Topeka, and Sante Fé Railroad Company should have the selection of a majority of the directors of the Denver Company, the other third being selected by the bondholders of the latter company ; that those contracts and agreements were made with the intent and design of ending all controversies, and especially all competitive construction of railroad lines, between the Denver Company on the one part, and the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fé Railroad Company and the roads operated by it, including the Pueblo and Arkansas Valley Railroad Company, on the other part; that, by reason of the premises, the Atchison, Topeka,
Upon the hearing of the motions it appeared, among other things, that on the first day of March, 1879, the Denver Company had issued 85,000 shares of stock, of which the plaintiffs in the motions claimed to own or control a bare majority, — 42,510 shares. It was also shown that, at a meeting of the directors of the Denver Company, held on Feb. 7, 1879, a quorum being present, resolutions were unanimously adopted, declaring that these motions were hostile to the interests of that company; that the claims of the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fé Railroad Company and the- Pueblo and Arkansas Valley Railroad Company were unfounded, and their assertion for the fraudulent purpose of depriving the Denver Company, its stockholders and creditors, of valuable rights, interests, and property, without compensation. The resolutions instructed the president and the attorneys of the company not only to
The motions are, therefore, denied, and we proceed to an examination of the cases upon their merits, premising that our present duty is limited to a determination of the rights of the parties as they existed when the final decrees were rendered, and as they are manifested in the records before us. If, since these decrees were entered, the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fé Railroad Company, or the Pueblo and Arkansas Yalley Railroad Company, have, by valid contract, acquired a controlling interest in the property, rights, and affairs of the Denver Company, that interest can be asserted by appropriate proceedings, and will not be affected by any thing we may determine upon the issues presented by these appeals.
The several acts of Congress upon which the Denver Company and the Canon City Company rest their respective claims to priority of right -in the Big or Grand Canon are cited, and the history of the organization of both companies given in the statement of the case. But there are other facts of an important character to which attention will be called in the course of this opinion.
The first question, upon the merits,, necessary to be considered is, as to the proper construction of the act of June 8, 1872. In its determination, however, we should not overlook what had previously transpired in the history of the company to which was granted, by that act, a right of way over the public domain. In January and February, 1871, very shortly after its articles of incorporation were filed in the proper office of the Territory, the Denver Company caused a survey to be made of the route through the Grand or Big Canon of the Arkansas, for the purpose, as declared by the engineer who conducted it, of retaining control of the cañón for that company. That survey, extending through the entire length of
Of what the company had done, prior to the passage of the act of 1872, towards effecting the objects of its incorporation, Congress, it is fairly to be presumed, was not uninformed. It was aware, we must also presume, of the routes designated in the charter of the company, for the main road and its several branches, all so connected as to constitute, when completed, an extended railway system for that entire region. That Congress was so informed is quite clearly indicated by the terms employed in the act of 1872. That act must, therefore, receive the same construction which would be adopted had it contained a full or detailed description of the routes of the main line and
It is here suggested by counsel for the Denver Company that the surveys made in the Grand Canon in 1871 and 1872 constituted, without further action on its part, a sufficient location and appropriation of at least that part of the designated route. To this proposition we cannot yield our assent. The right of way through that pass was not, in itself, and separate from the right of way along the whole route, of any special value, except the company surveyed its line and located its road east and west of that defile. The grant was an entirety as to the right of way over all the lands lying on the route designated in the charter of the company, arid' it would be unreasonable to say that, as to a particular part of that route, a mere preliminary survey was in itself equivalent to a fixed location of the road and an appropriation of the way granted, while as to another part of the general route a similar survey would not be an appropriation of the way granted, unless followed by actual occupation and use for railroad purposes. Any such construction of the statute must be held altogether inadmissible.
When was there, then, an appropriation by the Denver Company of the Grand Canon within the principle we have stated? In 1877 and 1878 it became evident that that pass was of vital importance to any company desiring to reach tha trade and business of the country beyond it, whether to
The last-named company now insists that it has the prior
The surveys of 1871 and 1872, although defective in some particulars, and not equivalent to an actual location or appropriation of the way, were quite as complete and extended as the survey which the Canon City Company caused to be made in 1877.- The evidence shows, beyond all question, that when the latter survey was made there was seen in the canon all or very many of the stakes which the engineer of the Denver Company had put there in 1871 and 1872. Those who made the survey in 1877 undoubtedly knew when, by whom, and for what purpose those-stakes had been there placed. Nor had they sufficient reason to suppose that the Denver Company had finally abandoned its purpose of constructing a road through thé canon. We have already referred to the completion of the road from Denver to Pueblo, and from Pueblo to Canon City, by July, 1875. In 1878, the Denver Company commenced the construction of one of its branches, — the Denver and Southern Railway. Commencing at Pueblo, it completed that road to Cucharas, fifty miles from Pueblo, by February, 1876; to Garland, sixty miles from there, by August, 1877; and to the valley of the Rio Grande, by July, 1878. After July, 1875, the company, it is true, suspended active work upon the line west of Cailon City. But the cause of such suspension, as its officers testify, was the widespread depression in business and financial circles, and the belief, shared by all interested in the prosperity of the company, that the extension of the line southward from Pueblo gave promisé of quicker returns and more immediate results in every way. They state that it was the purpose of the company to resume work upon its line through the canon as soon as the necessary means therefor could be obtained, and
But the important question remains as to the effect of the act of March 3, 1875, granting the right of way through the public lands of the United States to any railroad company duly organized under the laws of any State or Territory, except the District of Columbia, or by the Congress of the United States. The explicit language of that act leaves no doubt as to its object. It declares “that any railroad company whose right of way, or whose track or .road-bed upon such right of way, passes through any canon, pass, or defile, shall not prevent any other railroad company from the use and occupancy of said canon, pass, or defile, for the purposes of its road, in, common with the road first located, or the crossing of other railroads at grade.” At the date of that act the road of the Denver Company, as we have seen, had not been located through the Grand Canon of the Arkansas. But it had a subsisting grant of a right of way through that defile. According, therefore, to the act of March 3, 1875, the Canon City Company, if it belonged to the class described in the first section of the act, might, for the- purposes of its road, occupy and use that canon in common with the Denver Company.
Upon this branch of the case, the first 'contention of the latter company is that the Canon City Company was not “ duly organized ” under the laws of Colorado, and, therefore, by the terms' of the act of March 3, 1875, was not entitled to
But its right to claim the benefit of the act of March 3, 1877, is impeached upon the further ground that it was not organized in good faith, for the purpose of constructing a road for itself, but was the mere instrument of the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Company, by whom the real work of construction through the canon was carried on. It is not to be doubted, under the evidence, that the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fé Railroad Company is the active power behind all the movements made in the name of the Canon City Company for the occupation of the canon,’ and that the former company, or some of its stockholders, were deeply interested in the success of the movement to drive the Denver Company from the Grand Canon. But the Canon City Company is none the less a railroad company, duly organized under the laws of Colorado. It is, therefore, embraced by the very letter of the act of March 3, 1875. We are unable to perceive upon what sound principle the courts can go behind its regular and lawful organization, and exclude it from the rights granted by that act, because in the prosecution of its work it derives assistance or accepts aid from, another corporation, with which it may choose to share the benefits secured under the act of Congress.
Our next inquiry is as to the extent to which the rights of the Denver Company were affected or modified by the act of March 3,1875. When that act was passed, its grant of the right of way by the act of June 8, 1872, had not been acted upon as to the Grand Canon of the Arkansas. There had not been, on March 3, 1875, an actual location of its line through that defile, nor any occupancy thereof, in good faith, for .the purpose of constructing its road. The five years originally given to that company, within which to complete its railway to a point on the Rio Grande as far south as Santa Fé, expired on the 8th of June, 1877. Before, however, the expiration of that period, the time was extended to ten years from the passage of the original act. Now, it is solely by reason of such extension that- the Denver Company had the right, on the
It results fr6m what we have said, that the court below erred in enjoining-the Denver Company from proceeding with the construction of its road in the Grand Canon. The decree, -as entered, can only be sustained upon the assumption that the Canon City Company had by prior occupancy acquired a right superior to any which the Denver and Rio Grande Railway Company had to use the cauon for the purpose of constructing its road. But that assumption, we have seen, is not sustained by the evidence, and is inconsistent with the rights given by the acts of Congress to the Denver Company. The Denver Company should have been allowed to proceed with the construction of its road unobstructed by the other company. Where the Grand Canon is broad enough to enable both companies to proceed without interference with each, other in
The decrees in these causes are, therefore, reversed, with directions to set aside the order granting an injunction against the Denver and Rio Grande Railway Company, and also the order dissolving the injunction granted in its favor, and dismissing its bill. By proper orders, entered in each suit, the court below will' recognize the prior right of that company to occupy and use the Grand Canon for the purpose of constructing its road therein, and will enjoin the Canon City and San Juan Railway Company, its officers, agents, servants, and employés, from interfering with or obstructing that company in such occupancy, use, and construction. It may be that, during the pendency of these causes in the court below, or since the rendition of the decrees appealed from, the Canon City and San Juan Railway Company has, under the authority of the Circuit Court, constructed its road-bed and track in the Grand Canon, or in some portion thereof. In that event, the cost thus incurred in those portions of the cañón which admit of only one road-bed and track for railroad purposes may be ascertained and provided for in such manner and upon such terms and conditions as the equities of the parties may require.
. The court will make such further orders as may be necessary to give effect to this opinion.