The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation Part 72

You’re reading novel The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation Part 72 online at LightNovelFree.com. Please use the follow button to get notification about the latest chapter next time when you visit LightNovelFree.com. Use F11 button to read novel in full-screen(PC only). Drop by anytime you want to read free – fast – latest novel. It’s great if you could leave a comment, share your opinion about the new chapters, new novel with others on the internet. We’ll do our best to bring you the finest, latest novel everyday. Enjoy!

[1643] Ibid. 382-383.

[1644] Salt Co. _v._ East Saginaw, 13 Wall. 373, 379 (1872). _See also_ Welch _v._ Cook, 97 U.S. 541 (1879); Grand Lodge, F. & A.M. _v._ New Orleans, 166 U.S. 143 (1897); Wisconsin & M.R. Co. _v._ Powers, 191 U.S.

379 (1903). _Cf._ Ettor _v._ Tacoma, 228 U.S. 148 (1913), in which it was held that the repeal of a statute providing for consequential damages caused by changes of grades of streets could not const.i.tutionally affect an already accrued right to compensation.

[1645] _See_ Christ Church _v._ Philadelphia County, 24 How. 300, 302 (1861); Seton Hall College _v._ South Orange, 242 U.S. 100 (1916).

[1646] Compare the above case with Home of Friendless _v._ Rouse, 8 Wall. 430, 437 (1869); _also_ Illinois Central R. Co. _v._ Decatur, 147 U.S. 190 (1893) with Wisconsin & M.R. Co. _v._ Powers, 191 U.S. 379 (1903).

[1647] Crane _v._ Hahlo, 258 U.S. 142, 145-146 (1922); Louisiana ex rel.

Folsom _v._ New Orleans, 109 U.S. 285, 288 (1883); Morley _v._ Lakesh.o.r.e & M.S.R. Co., 146 U.S. 162, 169 (1892). That the obligation of contracts clause did not protect vested rights merely as such was stated by the Court as early as Satterlee _v._ Matthewson, 2 Pet. 380, 413 (1829); and again in the Charles River Bridge Co. _v._ Warren Bridge Co., 11 Pet.

420, 539-540 (1837).

[1648] _See_ Story's opinion. 4 Wheat. at 712.

[1649] Home of Friendless _v._ Rouse, 8 Wall. 430, 438 (1869); Pennsylvania College Cases, 13 Wall. 190, 213 (1872); Miller _v._ New York, 15 Wall. 478 (1873); Murray _v._ Charleston, 96 U.S. 432 (1878); Greenwood _v._ Union Freight R. Co., 105 U.S. 13 (1882); Chesapeake & O.R. Co. _v._ Miller, 114 U.S. 176 (1885); Louisville Water Co. _v._ Clark, 143 U.S. 1 (1892).

[1650] New Jersey _v._ Yard, 95 U.S. 104, 111 (1877).

[1651] _See_ Holyoke Water Power Co. _v._ Lyman, 15 Wall. 500, 520 (1873), following Fisheries _v._ Holyoke Water Power Co., 104 Ma.s.s. 446, 451 (1870); _also_ s.h.i.+elds _v._ Ohio, 95 U.S. 319 (1877); Fair Haven & W.R. Co. _v._ New Haven, 203 U.S. 379 (1906); Berea College _v._ Kentucky, 211 U.S. 45 (1908). _See also_ Lothrop _v._ Stedman, 15 Fed.

Cas. No. 8,519 (1875), where the principles of natural justice are thought to set a limit to the power. Earlier is Zabriskie _v._ Hackensack & N.Y.R. Co., 18 N.J. Eq. 178 (1867) where it is said that a new charter may not be subst.i.tuted; _also_ Allen _v._ McKean, 1 Fed.

Cas. No. 229 (1833) in which a federal court set aside a Maine statute somewhat like the one involved in the Dartmouth College case, on the ground that it went beyond the power of mere alteration. In this case, however, only the right to alter had been reserved, in the charter itself, and not the right to repeal.

[1652] _See_ in this connection the cases cited by Justice Sutherland in his opinion for the Court in Phillips Petroleum Co. _v._ Jenkins, 297 U.S. 629 (1936).

[1653] Curran _v._ Arkansas, 15 How. 304 (1853); s.h.i.+elds _v._ Ohio, 95 U.S. 319 (1877); Greenwood _v._ Union Freight R. Co., 105 U.S. 13 (1882); Adirondack R. Co. _v._ New York, 176 U.S. 335 (1900); Stearns _v._ Minnesota, 179 U.S. 223 (1900); Chicago, M. & St. P.R. Co. _v._ Wisconsin, 238 U.S. 491 (1915); Coombes _v._ Getz, 285 U.S. 434 (1932).

[1654] Pennsylvania College Cases, 13 Wall. 190, 218 (1872). _See also_ Calder _v._ Michigan, 218 U.S. 591 (1910).

[1655] Lakesh.o.r.e & M.S.R. Co. _v._ Smith, 173 U.S. 684, 690 (1899); Coombes _v._ Getz, 285 U.S. 434 (1932). Both these decisions cite Greenwood _v._ Union Freight R. Co., 105 U.S. 13, 17 (1882), but without apparent justification.

[1656] 4 Pet. 514 (1830).

[1657] Thorpe _v._ Rutland & Burlington Railroad Co., 27 Vt. 140 (1854).

[1658] Thus a railroad may be required, at its own expense and irrespective of benefits to itself, to eliminate grade crossings in the interest of public safety, (New York & N.E.R. Co. _v._ Bristol, 151 U.S.

556 (1894)); to make highway crossings reasonably safe and convenient for public use, (Great Northern R. Co. _v._ Minnesota, 246 U.S. 434 (1918)); to repair viaducts, (Northern Pac. R. Co. _v._ Minnesota, 208 U.S. 583 (1908)); and to fence its right of way, (Minneapolis & St. L.R.

Co. _v._ Emmons, 149 U.S. 364 (1893)). Though a railroad company owns the right of way along a street, the city may require it to lay tracks to conform to the established grade; to fill in tracks at street intersections; and to remove tracks from a busy street intersection, when the attendant disadvantages and expense are small and the safety of the public appreciably enhanced, (Denver & R.G.R. Co. _v._ Denver, 250 U.S. 241 (1919)).

Likewise the State, in the public interest, may require a railroad to reestablish an abandoned station, even though the railroad commission had previously authorized its abandonment on condition that another station be established elsewhere, a condition which had been complied with, (New Haven & N. Co. _v._ Hamersley, 104 U.S. 1 (1881)). It may impose upon a railroad liability for fire communicated by its locomotives, even though the State had previously authorized the company to use said type of locomotive power, (St. Louis & S.F.R. Co. _v._ Mathews, 165 U.S. 1, 5 (1897)); and it may penalize the failure to cut drains through embankments so as to prevent flooding of adjacent lands, (Chicago & A.R. Co. _v._ Tranbarger, 238 U.S. 67 (1915)).

[1659] Boston Beer Co. _v._ Ma.s.sachusetts, 97 U.S. 25 (1878). _See also_ Fertilizing Co. _v._ Hyde Park, 97 U.S. 659 (1878); and Hammond Packing _v._ Arkansas, 212 U.S. 322, 345 (1909).

[1660] 11 Pet. 420 (1837).

[1661] 11 Pet. at 548-553.

[1662] 201 U.S. 400 (1906).

[1663] Ibid. 471-472, citing The Binghamton Bridge, 3 Wall. 51, 75 (1865).

[1664] Memphis & L.R.R. Co. _v._ Berry, 112 U.S. 609, 617 (1884). _See also_ Picard _v._ East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia R. Co., 130 U.S.

637, 641 (1889); Louisville & N.R. Co. _v._ Palmes, 109 U.S. 244, 251 (1883); Morgan _v._ Louisiana, 93 U.S. 217 (1876); Wilson _v._ Gaines, 103 U.S. 417 (1881); Norfolk & W.R. Co. _v._ Pendleton, 156 U.S. 667, 673 (1895).

[1665] Railroad Co. _v._ Georgia, 98 U.S. 359, 365 (1879).

[1666] Phoenix F. & M. Insurance Co. _v._ Tennessee, 161 U.S. 174 (1896).

[1667] Rochester R. Co. _v._ Rochester, 205 U.S. 236 (1907); followed in Wright _v._ Georgia R. & Bkg. Co., 216 U.S. 420 (1910); and New York Rapid Transit Co. _v._ City of New York, 303 U.S. 573 (1938). _Cf._ Tennessee _v._ Whitworth, 117 U.S. 139 (1886) the authority of which is respected in the preceding case.

[1668] Chicago, B. & K.C.R. Co. _v._ Missouri ex rel. Guffey, 120 U.S.

569 (1887).

[1669] Ford _v._ Delta & Pine Land Co., 164 U.S. 662 (1897).

[1670] Vicksburg, S. & P.R. Co. _v._ Dennis, 116 U.S. 665 (1886).

[1671] Millsaps College _v._ Jackson, 275 U.S. 129 (1927).

[1672] Hale _v._ Iowa State Board of a.s.sessment, 302 U.S. 95 (1937).

[1673] Stone _v._ Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (Railroad Commission Cases), 116 U.S. 307, 330 (1886) extended in Southern Pacific Co. _v._ Campbell, 230 U.S. 537 (1913) to cases in which the word "reasonable" does not appear to qualify the company's right to prescribe tolls. _See also_ American Toll Bridge Co. _v._ Railroad Com. of California et al., 307 U.S. 486 (1939).

[1674] Georgia R. & Power Co. _v._ Decatur, 262 U.S. 432 (1923). _See also_ Southern Iowa Electric Co. _v._ Chariton, 255 U.S. 539 (1921).

[1675] Walla Walla _v._ Walla Walla Water Co., 172 U.S. 1, 15 (1898).

[1676] Skaneateles Water Works Co. _v._ Skaneateles, 184 U.S. 354 (1902); Knoxville Water Co. _v._ Knoxville, 200 U.S. 22 (1906); Madera Water Works _v._ Madera, 228 U.S. 454 (1913).

[1677] Rogers Park Water Co. _v._ Fergus, 180 U.S. 624 (1901).

[1678] Home Telephone Co. _v._ Los Angeles, 211 U.S. 265 (1908); Wyandotte Gas Co. _v._ Kansas, 231 U.S. 622 (1914).

[1679] _See also_ Puget Sound Traction, Light & P. Co. _v._ Reynolds, 244 U.S. 574 (1917). "Before we can find impairment of a contract we must find an obligation of the contract which has been impaired. Since the contract here relied upon is one between a political subdivision of a state and private individuals, settled principles of construction require that the obligation alleged to have been impaired be clearly and unequivocally expressed." Justice Black for the Court in Keefe _v._ Clark, 322 U.S. 393, 396-397 (1944).

[1680] Corporation of Brick Church _v._ Mayor et al., 5 Cowen (N.Y.) 538, 540 (1826).

[1681] West River Bridge Co. _v._ Dix, 6 How. 507 (1848). _See also_ Backus _v._ Lebanon, 11 N.H. 19 (1840); White River Turnpike Co. _v._ Vermont Cent. R. Co., 21 Vt. 590 (1849); and Bonaparte _v._ Camden & A.R. Co., 3 Fed. Cas. No. 1,617 (1830); cited in Calvert I, 960-961.

[1682] Pennsylvania Hospital _v._ Philadelphia, 245 U.S. 20 (1917).

[1683] Illinois Central Railroad _v._ Illinois, 146 U.S. 387, 453, 455 (1892).

[1684] _See_ pp. 335-336.

[1685] _See_ especially Home of the Friendless _v._ Rouse, 8 Wall. 430 (1869), and Was.h.i.+ngton University _v._ Rouse, 8 Wall. 439 (1869).

[1686] Georgia Railway Co. _v._ Redwine, 342 U.S. 299, 305-06 (1952).

The Court distinguishes In re Ayers, 123 U.S. 443 (1887) on the ground that the action there was barred "as one in substance directed against the State to obtain specific performance of a contract with the State".

The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation Part 72

You're reading novel The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation Part 72 online at LightNovelFree.com. You can use the follow function to bookmark your favorite novel ( Only for registered users ). If you find any errors ( broken links, can't load photos, etc.. ), Please let us know so we can fix it as soon as possible. And when you start a conversation or debate about a certain topic with other people, please do not offend them just because you don't like their opinions.


The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation Part 72 summary

You're reading The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation Part 72. This novel has been translated by Updating. Author: Corwin, Edward Samuel already has 684 views.

It's great if you read and follow any novel on our website. We promise you that we'll bring you the latest, hottest novel everyday and FREE.

LightNovelFree.com is a most smartest website for reading novel online, it can automatic resize images to fit your pc screen, even on your mobile. Experience now by using your smartphone and access to LightNovelFree.com

RECENTLY UPDATED NOVEL