NIVRAHA149_01023 |
Vorige | 1023 van 1308 | Volgende |
|
klein (250x250 max)
gemiddeld (500x500 max)
groot
Extra Large
groot ( > 500x500)
Hoge Resolutie
Allen (PDF)
|
Deze pagina
Allen
|
Ch. 4] THE REORGANIZATION OF RAILROADS 999
failure and its consequences the public utility character of a
railway corporation is brought most clearly into evidence.*
Railway Reorganizations Classified.—This brief outline
of the form of contemporary railroad reorganization is altogether
too general and superficial to be of significance when
applied to concrete cases. All railroads differ among themselves.
The specific causes of railway failure are never the
same in two instances, so that the specific remedies to be applied
will necessarily vary according to the individual case. Consequently,
in order to discuss reorganization plans in any except
the most general terms, and to treat of the subject with clearness
and definiteness of outline, it is necessary to arrange railroad
reorganizations themselves according to some kind of
system of classification, else any detailed discussion of the subject
degenerates into a mere jargon of unordered cases. But a
classification of railway reorganizations is difficult, owing to
t The long history of judicial opinion, in which the doctrine of the
priority of public over private rights—provided federal constitutional rights
are not jeopardized—has been traced many times. It was consciously
acknowledged in 1876 ^" and culminated in the assumption of federal control
of the railroads of January i, 1918.''^
One or two findings in connection with receivership proceedings are
of moment in this connection. As long ago as 1874 the New Jersey Southern
Railroad and Long Branch and Sea Shore Railroad were put in the
hands of receivers because no daily trains were run for ten consecutive
days. These cases present an early discussion of the rights of the public
under state law. Among other things the chancellor said: "The Legislature
may be presumed to have acted on the assumption that the grant of
franchises to a railroad company is primarily to provide a highway for
the public, and that there is an implied contract on the part of the
company to build, equip and operate their road for the use of the public." '^
And eighteen years later, in 1892, a receiver was appointed for the Chicago
and Southwestern Railway by an Indiana court, merely because certain
shippers alleged that the road was unable to care for their business"''
About this same time Judge Hanford succinctly stated the present attitude
of the courts toward railroads, in connection with the Northern Pacific
litigation. "A railroad is a public highroad, designed for public use. A
corporation owning it enjoys a public franchise which makes it in a
measure a public servant, obligated to serve the public by keeping the
road in operation." °'
™Munn V. 111., 94 U. S. 113.
31 For an exhau-stive account, see Ripley, W. Z., Railroads, Rates and Regulation,
Chaps. XII to XX (1912).
'2 In re Long Branch & Sea Shore R. R. Co., 9 C. E. Green 398, 404.
33 32 Chi. Ry. Rev., 479.
3» Farmers Loan & Tr. Co. v. Nor. Pac. R. R. Co., 71 Fed. 246 (1896).
Beschrijving voorwerp
| Titel | The financial policy of corporations |
| Auteur | Dewing, Arthur Stone |
| Jaartal | 1926 |
| Collectienaam | NIVRA Historisch Archief, UBVU gedigitaliseerd |
| PPN | 344552586 |
| Toegangsgegevens (URL) | http://imagebase.ubvu.vu.nl/getobj.php?ppn=344552586 |
| Signatuur origineel | NIVRAHA149 |
| Evaluatie |
Beschrijving
| Titel | NIVRAHA149_01023 |
| Transcript | Ch. 4] THE REORGANIZATION OF RAILROADS 999 failure and its consequences the public utility character of a railway corporation is brought most clearly into evidence.* Railway Reorganizations Classified.—This brief outline of the form of contemporary railroad reorganization is altogether too general and superficial to be of significance when applied to concrete cases. All railroads differ among themselves. The specific causes of railway failure are never the same in two instances, so that the specific remedies to be applied will necessarily vary according to the individual case. Consequently, in order to discuss reorganization plans in any except the most general terms, and to treat of the subject with clearness and definiteness of outline, it is necessary to arrange railroad reorganizations themselves according to some kind of system of classification, else any detailed discussion of the subject degenerates into a mere jargon of unordered cases. But a classification of railway reorganizations is difficult, owing to t The long history of judicial opinion, in which the doctrine of the priority of public over private rights—provided federal constitutional rights are not jeopardized—has been traced many times. It was consciously acknowledged in 1876 ^" and culminated in the assumption of federal control of the railroads of January i, 1918.''^ One or two findings in connection with receivership proceedings are of moment in this connection. As long ago as 1874 the New Jersey Southern Railroad and Long Branch and Sea Shore Railroad were put in the hands of receivers because no daily trains were run for ten consecutive days. These cases present an early discussion of the rights of the public under state law. Among other things the chancellor said: "The Legislature may be presumed to have acted on the assumption that the grant of franchises to a railroad company is primarily to provide a highway for the public, and that there is an implied contract on the part of the company to build, equip and operate their road for the use of the public." '^ And eighteen years later, in 1892, a receiver was appointed for the Chicago and Southwestern Railway by an Indiana court, merely because certain shippers alleged that the road was unable to care for their business"'' About this same time Judge Hanford succinctly stated the present attitude of the courts toward railroads, in connection with the Northern Pacific litigation. "A railroad is a public highroad, designed for public use. A corporation owning it enjoys a public franchise which makes it in a measure a public servant, obligated to serve the public by keeping the road in operation." °' ™Munn V. 111., 94 U. S. 113. 31 For an exhau-stive account, see Ripley, W. Z., Railroads, Rates and Regulation, Chaps. XII to XX (1912). '2 In re Long Branch & Sea Shore R. R. Co., 9 C. E. Green 398, 404. 33 32 Chi. Ry. Rev., 479. 3» Farmers Loan & Tr. Co. v. Nor. Pac. R. R. Co., 71 Fed. 246 (1896). |
Tags
Toelichtingen
Geef een Toelichting voor NIVRAHA149_01023
