STATE OF WISCONSIN
THE RAILROAD LAW OF 1874.
PROCLAMATION AND ADDRESS
BY THE GOVERNOR.
Opinion of the Attorney General.
CLASSIFICATION OF ROADS AND RATES OF
FARE AND FREIGHT, BY THE RAIL¬
ROAD COMMISSIONERS. .
MADISON, WIS.:
ATWOOD & CULVER, PRINTERS AND STEREOTYPERS.
i874-
library
bureau of railway economics,
, | washington. d. c.
uwv, of wta m exehawwfc'
librafi v
b'ureau of railway f.)'jnomio'- ■
washingto'l. >). 0.
PROCLAMATION BT THE GOVERNOR.
State of Wisconsin,
Executive Office,
Madison, May 1, 1874.
Whereas, The legislature, at its last session, passed an act enti¬
tled " An act in relation to railroads, express and telegraph compa¬
nies in the state of Wisconsin," classifying railroads and freights,
limiting and fixing the compensation to be charged for the transpor¬
tation of freight and passengers, and providing for the appointment
of railroad commissioners; and
Whereas, The power of the legislature to regulate the operation
of such companies in the respects named, is conceded to exist; and
Whereas, Said act was duly approved on the 4th day of March,
A. D. 1874, and was officially published on the 28th day of April, A.
D. 1874, and is now to all intents and purposes, the law of the land ;
and
Whereas, The Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railroad Com¬
pany, and the Chicago and Northwestern Railroad Company, on the
'29th of April, A. D. 1874, filed in the Executive Department com¬
munications signed by their respective presidents, and addressed to
the Governor of the state of Wisconsin, in which they announce a
determination to operate their roads without reference to the provis¬
ions of the act, and in defiance of its requirements; and
Whereas, This unusual course on the part of these two great
•corporations, is at once a source of profound regret, and in marked
contrast with the patience and submission exhibited by the people in
the presence of what they have deemed the unjust and burdensome
•exactions of the railroad companies in the past, and if persisted in
must seriously disturb the business and greatly imperil the indus¬
tries of the state ; and
Whereas, Tne constitution of the state devolves upon the exec¬
utive the duty to " expedite all 3uch measures as snail be resolved
by the legislature, and to take care that the laws be faithfully exe-
•ecuted."
Now, therefore, I, William R. Taylor, governor of the state of
Wisconsin, do proclaim and make known that the law of the land
must be respected and obeyed. While none are so weak as to be
without its protection, none are so strong as to be above its re¬
straints. If the provisions of the law be deemed oppressive, re-
4
sistance to its mandates will not abate, but rather multiply the anti¬
cipated evils. It may be that the law is defective in some of its de¬
tails, but it is still the law of the land, enacted by the legislature in
the exercise of its conceded powers, and in accordance with the
clearly expressed sentiment of the people of the state. It is the
right of all to test its validity through the constituted channels, but
with that right is coupled the duty of yielding general obedience to
its requirements until it has been pronounced invalid by competent
authority. I am not without hope that better counsels will yet pre¬
vail with the railroad companies of the state ; but if they or any of
them are fixed in the determination to pursue the policy announced,
•upon them will fall the penalties of the law, and the consequences
of severe popular condemnation.
I, therefore, enjoin all railroad corporations, their officers and
agents, peaceably to submit to the law, for, since the executive is
charged with the responsibility of seeing that the laws are faithfully
executed, all the function of his office will be exercised to that end;
and for this purpose he invokes the aid and co-operation of all good
citizens.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name and
caused the great seal of the state to be hereto affixed.
Done at the capitol in the city of Madison, this first day of May,,
in the year of our Lord, 1874.
[l. s.]
By the Governor:
Peter Doyle,
Secretary of State.
ADDRESS BY THE GOVERNOR.
State of Wisconsin,
Executive Department,
Madison, May 21, 1874.
To the People of Wisconsin:
The act of your legislature, passed at the last session, entitled
"An act relating to railroads, express and telegraph companies in
the state of Wisconsin," was approved by me March 11, 1874, in
the firm conviction of the necessity and validity of such legislation.
But, in order that ample time should be given to the railroad com¬
panies affected thereby to arrange their business so as to meet its re¬
quirements, the legislature very considerately directed that its pub¬
lication, which was essential to its taking effect, should be delayed
until the 28th day of April.
So far from using this period of forty-eight days for such purpose,
however, two of the most powerful railroad companies, as you are
aware, to-wit: the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul, and the Chicago &
Northwestern Railway Companies, appear to have employed it in
conspiring against the law, and in laying plans to defeat its opera¬
tion. To this end, they procured, and widely published, the opin¬
ions of counsel hitherto in high repute, denying, first, the right of
the state to limit the tariff's of railway corporations; and, secondly,
upon the basis of ex parte testimony, pronouncing this particular law
invalid, on account of the rates therein prescribed being unjust and
unreasonable, and gravely encouraging disobedience to its com¬
mands. Acting upon these opinions of interested counsel, and
under the dictation of directors residing in remote parts of the coun¬
try, the presidents of these companies then addressed to your exec¬
utive, communications, declaring their belief in the injustice and in¬
validity of the law, and their deliberate purpose to disregard its pro¬
visions.
It is known to you that immediately thereafter, to wit, on the
first day of May, I made public proclamation of these facts, de¬
claring that the law of the land must be obeyed; that while the
right of all to test the validity of the law is conceded, with that
right is coupled the duty of yielding obedience to its require¬
ments until it has been pronounced invalid by competent authori¬
ty ; expressing the hope that better counsels would yet prevail
with the railroad companies of the state; and enjoining all rail¬
road corporations, their officers and agents, peaceably to submit to
6
the law. This counsel and proclamation of your Executive have
have been wholy disregarded.
The corporations above named have arranged their tariffs without
the slightest apparent regard to the classification and rates prescribed
in the law, and prepared and published by the Board of Railroad
Commissioners. In many cases they have even increased their rates-
for transportation of freight above what they were when the# law
was enacted and became of binding obligation. They have issued
commands to their agents and employees, requiring of them a like
obedience, under pains and penalties which, in many cases, practi¬
cally amount to compulsion; thus usings their influence and power
to insure the criminal disobedieuce of many citizens, habituating
them to a contempt for the authority of the state, when its laws are
not in harmony with a supposed self-interest, and hence contributing
in a high degree to weaken the respect for law in general. They are-
now exacting and receiving rates which the Legislature, after much
consideration, and the patient hearing of able counsel and officers-
representing their interests, has, in effect, solemnly declared unreason¬
able, unjust and extortionate, and they boldly proclaim to the
authorities and people of the state, and to the world, that they will
continue so to do, any law of the state, not approved by them, to the
contrary notwithstanding. In a word, they have set up another
law than that of the state, and have made obedience to it the su¬
preme duty of all their corporate servanls and the present necessity
of the whole people.
No objection is made to any just contest upon the validity of the
law. The courts of this state are open to every suitor, and the cause
of every defendant will be heard with impartiality and decided upon
principles of justice. Indeed, the state has already instituted, and
will urge to the speediest possible issue, suits in the supreme court,,
involving the validity of the law. But for the meantime, or until
the law is amended or repealed, it is sufficient for your Executive,
and should be enough for every corporation and every citizen, that
the principle upon which it rests, has been affirmed by the supreme
courts of the state and the United States, as well as by very many of
the ablest jurists in the country, and that the statute itselt has been
in due form enacted and approved, and is the law of the land.
If other motives were needed to insure obedience to its mandates
it might easily be found in the fact that the law had origin in a deep
conviction, widely felt, that the railway corporations of the state, al¬
though recipients of great gifts and franchises, have, in many in¬
stances, exacted excessive tolls, and made unjust discriminations, to
the injury of citizens and the enrichment of directors and managers,
if not of stockholders; and that the very powers conferred upon
them for the public good, as well as for their corporate advantage,
have been systematically exercised to prevent the enactment of just
laws for the redress of these grievances.
However this may be, it cannot be suffered that the charge of
■unreasonableness made by those whom the law seeks to restrain
from extorting excessive rates shall so far arraign its justice as to
7
suspend its operation until, by the tedious processes of the courts,
delayed by appeals and every possible legal artifice, its validity is,
at length fully determined. Submission like this on the part of the
Executive and people would result in a continuance of extortionate
gains by the corporations, and perhaps yet greater sacrifice by the
people for years to come. Nor is this all. The delay being granted,
what guaranty is to be found in the present attitude of these great
corporations that they would yield a willing obedience in the event
of an affirmative'decision by the courts? If they have become so
strong and independent of the State that the legislature cannot be
sure of their obedience until its enactments are first approved by
the courts, is it certain that even the courts will be able to effect a
jieaceable compliance ? It cannot be suffered that any law, which
the legislature has enacted and the Executive approved, shall be
put in abeyance and treated with open disobedience and flagraht
contempt by any person, corporation or combination of corporations,
on the plea of unreasonableness, or upon any plea whatever. Such
a sufference would tend to a subversion of all legal authority.
Fellow Citizens: The foregoing facts and considerations can lead
but to one conclusion. As stated in my Annual Message,
" It must be admitted that railroad companies are necessary to the prosperity
and development of the state, and that in the discharge of their honorable obli¬
gations to the public, they are entitled to the gratitude and positive and uniform,
protection of the legislative authority. In this matter the people will make no
peace with enemies, but they seek no war with friends "While they are willing
to encourage to the fullest extent, the development of the railway system of our
state, they cannot submit to manifest injustice, nor permit the abuse of chartered
privileges."
The law must therefore be enforced, and with a rigor duly propor¬
tioned to the power and defiance of the offenders.
It is for this reason, and because of the general apprehension that
exists as to the steps necessary to the enforcement, that I have felt
it my solemn duty, after reasonable delay and the accumulation of
evidence, to follow my proclamation with this plain and fuller
statement of the whole case in its present aspect; setting forth the
nature and enormity of this conspiracy against the law, and the dan¬
ger it threatens to our free institutions and the imperative duty of
every citizen to lend his aid in putting it down.
The law clearly defines the obligations of the railway corporations,
and provides ample remedies for its violation. But the legislature,
anticipating no such extraordinary and flagrant violation and con¬
tempt of its statutes, has made no provision to enable either the
executive or the railroad commissioners to meet the emergency with
extraordinary means; it is simply provided that every infraction
should be punished by the ordinary means of prosecuting to con¬
viction and punishment by fine and damages, every offender. It
naturally assumed that the people, who had so repeatedly made the
charge of extortion and oppression, only waited for an opportunity
to apply the remedy for their grievances ; that they were prepared
for a prompt discharge of the patriotic duty of co-operating with
the public authorities for a vindication of the sovreignty of the
8
state, and for the enforcement of a law by themselves declared to be
essential to the general welfare. And hence, although ample facil¬
ities are afforded for the convenient trial of offenders by giving to
justices of the peace concurrent jurisdiction with the circuit courts,
yet, as in other actions of a criminal nature, no prosecution can origi¬
nate otherwise than in complaint made by the injured party or some other
person having knowledge of the offense.
With the usual cheerful obedience given to the laws, a few appli¬
cations of this remedy would induce a general acquiesence. But if
the aggregate wealth of great corporations is to support an organized
and general defiance of law, the only means provided must be cordi¬
ally employed by all good citizens, and your Executive sustained by
the hearty co-operation of subordinate officials.
I cannot doubt that this support and co-operation will be accorded,
"when the whole case is fairly understood. The interests at stake
are too vast and too vital to admit of any other conclusion. For it
will then be seen, not only that this particular law, framed by a
legislature of your own choosing, enacted in your interest, and in
obedience to your own express command, is disregarded and con¬
temned, but that the very idea and principle of law, and a just
sense of the duty of obedience to the constituted authorities, would
be clouded and imperilled by a neglect promptly to meet, rebuke, and
punish such defiance of the popular will. It will also be seen that
the people are dealing with a powerful and dangerous combination,
which holds itself above the law, and seeks to make its own sanction
superior to the sanction of any statute—that it is not the form and
terms of this law upon which issue is taken, but that these corpora¬
tions deny the principle that a railway, though built with the public
consent, for a public use, and in part with the aid of public gifts,
and chartered under a constitution which expressly reserves to the
people the right of general control, can, for any purpose, in any
way, be limited as to its tolls by regulations other than those of its
own corporators.
Believing, then, that to the authority of the state and to the sup¬
port of public officers in their efforts to curb and restrain the threat¬
ening powers of the great corporate bodies which now boldly defy
them, you will bring promptly and manfully all the aid and co-ope¬
ration which every citizen owes to the state in any time of peril to
her institutions, her authority or her laws ; and being deeply sensi¬
ble of the obligations resting upon me to avert, if possible, the dan¬
ger now impending, I call upon and enjoin every citizen of this state
to observe with scrupulous care the requirements of the law herein re¬
ferred to, in every instance and particular of business dealings with
any railroad company of this state, especially the companies herein
named ; to pay as a traveler no higher fare than the law prescribes;
to pay as a shipper or receiver of freights no higher rates than the
law prescribes, all which rates the Railroad Commissioners have
fixed and published ; and that if in any exigency or necessity he
should suffer any sum in excess of legal rates to be extorted from
1 him by any agent of any such company, he notify, with all conveni-
9
•ent dispatch, the district attorney of his county of such violation of
law.
I also request and enjoin all district attorneys promptly and vigor¬
ously to prosecute to conviction and punishment all offenders against
said law.
I further enjoin all constables and police officers within the state,
to inquire of all such offenses, and to complain against the offenders
before some justice of the peace, and diligently to take care that this
law be not violated in their own precincts with impunity.
Printed forms and instructions for the prosecution of such actions
will be promptly furnished, on the request of any officer of the law,
made to the Attorney General, at Madison.
In the possible contingency of a sufficient resistance to the local
authorities to require the interference of the Executive, the guaran¬
tees contained in my proclamation of May 1st can be relied on with
the utmost confidence.
WM. R TAYLOR,
Governor of Wisconsin.
OPINION OF ATTORNEY GENERAL SLOAN.
To His Excellency, William R. Taylor,
Governor of the State of Wisconsin:
Sir: In pursuance of your request, I submit the following opinion:
The legislature of the state of Wisconsin, at its last annual session passed " an
act relating to railroads, express and telegraph companies in the state of Wis¬
consin," being chapter 273, and which tools effect on the 28th day of April, 1874..
This act classified all the railroads of the state, fixed and limited the compen¬
sation to be charged for the transportation of freight and passengers thereon,
and provided for the appointment of three railroad commissioners with the pow¬
ers and duties therein prescribed.
The question submitted to this office, is as to the constitutionality and validity
of this enactment.
The constitution of the state provides, Art. XI. § 1, "that corporations maybe
formed under general laws, but shall not be created by a special act, except for
municipal purposes, and in cases where, in the judgment of the legislature, the
objects of the corporations cannot be attained under general laws. All gen¬
eral laws or special acts enacted under the provisions of this section may be al¬
tered or repealed by the legislature at any time after their passage."
It seems to be conceded on all sides that the railroads of this state take and
hold their franchises subject to this reserved power of alteration and repeal, but
the precise meaning of the reservation, and what, if any limits shall be applied
to it, have led to some discussion and difference of opinion.
Since the decision of the Darmouth College case, in which the supreme court
of the United States held that a charter of incorporation wras in the nature of a
grant, creating a contract, beyond the power of the legislature to impair, many
of the states have, by general statutes, special clauses in corporate charters, or
by constitutional provisions, sought to re-establish over such corporations tlie-
legislative control which, previous to that decision, was supposed to exist. And
any construction which so limits this reservation of power, as to deprive tlie-
legislature of all supervision over, or right to regulate, the exercise of the fran¬
chise, would fall far short of the evident intention of its enactment, and of the
remedy which it was designed to afford, against the encroachments of powerful
corporations. This intent is well expressed in the case of Tomilson vs. Jessup,
15 Wall., p. 454, in which Justice Field, delivering the opinion of the court
says, " the object of the reservation and of similar reservations is to prevent a
grant of corporate rights and privileges in a form which will preclude legisla¬
tive interference with their exercise, it the public interest should at any time
require such interference; it is a provision intended to preserve to the state, the
control over its contract with the corporations, which, without that provision-
would be irrepealable, and protected from any measures affecting its obli¬
gation."
The courts of our own state have had frequent occasion to refer to this con¬
stitutional provision, and while they have not passed upon the direct question
now presented, have expressed an opinion as to the purpose of its adoption and
of its scope and effect.
In the Madison, Watertown & Milwaukee Plank Road Co. v. Reynolds, 3.
Wis., p. 287, there was an amendment of a territorial charter, affecting the rate
of toll which might be charged by the Plank Road Company, and the point
raised was that the act of incorporation was a contract under which the com-
11
pany invested its money, in consideration of the tolls it was authorized to re¬
ceive, and that the legislature could not amend the charter by reducing such,
tolls, and thus take away a portion of the property of the company. Chief Jus¬
tice Wliiton, after discussing the question under the territorial laws, quotes Art.
XI, of our state constitution, and remarks, " this provision may obviate the ne¬
cessity of the consideration of questions like the one before us, in all cases
where the corporation is created by the state,'' asingularly mistaken idea, if it be
indeed true that the provision reserves no power of alteration to the legislature
and could not prevent the future consideration of such questions.
So in the case of Pratt v. Brown, 3 Wis., p. 603, Mr. Justice Smith, after re¬
ferring to the doctrine established in the Dartmouth College case, proceeds to
say " it is competent, nevertheless, for each state by constitutional regulation or
specific legislative enactment, to reserve the power to modify or repeal all such,
acts of incorporation, where the power of modification or repeal is reserved,,
either in the one mode or the other; it is obvious that the grantees must rely for
the perpetuity and integrity of the franchise granted to them, solely upon the
faith of the sovereign grantor * * and all such corporations now rest upon,
the faith of the state, taking care to deserve its favor or command its justice by
observing strictly the limits of their powers and accomplishing by all legiti¬
mate means the objects of their creation."
And in Nazro v. Merchants' Ins. Co., 14 Wis., p. 295, Chief Justice Dixon, in
discussing an amendment to the charter of the defendant company, authorizing
the trustees to adopt a new mode of insurance, makes use of this language ::
"This is a grant to the trustees of new and distinct powers, such as they could
not before have exercised, either as a matter of corporate authority, or of legal
or constitutional right as between themselves or the corporation and the stock¬
holders. The latter might have.objected to it as a violation of the contract under
which they became members of the company. But for the reserved power of
the legislature to alter or repeal the charter, this objection would be still open
to them."
And in Chapln and another, v. Crusen and another, 31 Wis., p 209, Mr. Jus¬
tice Lyon, in discussing the power of the legislature to repeal the grant of a
ferry franchise before the expiration of the time for which it was to continue by
the original act, and to confer the franchise upon another person holds that such
power existed as to an individual, because the grant did not amount to a con¬
tract; and he adds: "These views may perhaps be strengthened by the provis¬
ions of the constitution, Art. XI, Sec. 1, which give the legislature power to al¬
ter or repeal the charter of corporations created by it. Had this franchise been
conferred on such a corporation, there can be no doubt that the legislature might
take it away."
These citations sufficiently show the opinions entertained by the courts of our
own state, as to the design and extent of the reservation, and seem to war¬
rant the conclusion that there can be no such limitation of the power as is now
claimed for it, or that can effect the validity of the law under consideration; and
the adjudications in the courts of other states, and of the supreme court of the
United States, are in entire harmony with our own, and abundantly sustain the
legislation of last session and its constitutional validity.
The case of McLaren v. Pennington, 1 Paige, ch. p. 102, was where the legis¬
lature of New Jersey had incorporated a bank to continue not exceeding twen¬
ty-one years, with a proviso that it should be lawful for the legislature at any
time to repeal the charter. As a consideration for the charter, the sum of $25,-
000 was to be paid by the bank to the treasurer of the stale. The bank was or¬
ganized in June; it paid into the treasury of the state the $25,000 and com¬
menced operations. In the November following the legislature repealed the
act of incorporation, and the court held, Chancellor Walworth delivering the
opinion, not only that the power to repeal existed under the reservation, but
that the court would not presume it to have been improperly exercised.
The case of Crease v. Babcock, 23 Pick. p. 334, was where a bank of which
the defendant was a stockholder had been incorporated and with power to re¬
peal reserved only in case of some violation of the charter or other default. In
that state stockholders were only liable individually, on the expiration of the
charter, and the defendant insisted that under the clause reserving the right to
repeal the charter, the default of the bank must first be ascertained and deter¬
mined by the courts, and that until that were done, the legislature could not ex¬
ercise the power of repeal, but the court held that the acceptance of the charter
12
made a compact under which the legislature could repeal " and the grantees
could have no reason to complain of the execution of their own contract."
The court also held that they would presume that the contingency upon which
the right to repeal depended, had happened.
Suydam v. Moore, 8 Barbour, p. 588, was the case of an amendment or rather
an act imposing additional obligations upon railroads as to cattle guards, and
the court held that the right to legislate in that respect existed and that the
policy of the enactment could not be questioned in the courts.
The Northern Railroad Co. v. Miller, 10 Barbour, p. 2G0, was an action to en¬
force payment of stock subscribed by the defendant, and resisted on the ground
that the legislature had amended the charter of the company. The court held
that the power to amend existed and that the individual, by subscribing for the
stock " stipulates that the legislature may alter or repeal the law, and thus
change the obligation or defeat it altogether."
In Perrin v. Oliver, 1 Minn., p. 202, the court decided that an act granting a
ferry franchise two miles in extent could be altered by the legislature and re¬
duced to one-fourth of a mile, under the reserved power to amend or repeal.
And so in the Erie railroad cases, 26 and 27 Penn., the court held that the
language of the reservation was to be construed strongly in favor of the state and
that under it the legislature had the right summarily to repeal the charter of the
Erie railroad.
In the matter of the Reciprocity Bank, 22 N. Y., p. 9, the charter of the bank
was amended by imposing an individual liability on the stockholders, not pro¬
vided for by the original charter, and the Court of Appeals held that by the re¬
served power, as a part of the contract, the state could amend the charter at will,
reaffirming the matter of the Olive Lee Bank, 21 N. Y.,p. 9. This last case was
appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, and is reported in 1 Black,
p. 587. The general banking law, under which this bank was organized pro¬
vided in express terms that no shareholder should be individually liable for any
contract, debt or engagement of the corporation, and the articles of association
contained a similar clause. The law also provided that the legislature might at
any time alter or repeal the act. ■ The plaintiff:', Sherman, became a stockholder,
and subsequently the legislature passed an act making shareholders personally
liable for the debts of the association. The question raised was whether the last
act was in conflict with the constitution of the United States which forbids a
state to make any law impairing the obligation of contracts. All the courts
of New York held that it was not, and the Supreme Court of the United States
affirmed the decision, Mr. Justice Nelson remarking: "Now the 32d section,
which reserved to the legislature the power to alter or repeal the act, by neces¬
sary construction reserved the power to alter or repeal all or any one of these
terms and conditions or rules of liability prescribed in the act; the articles of
association are dependent upon and become a part of, the law under which the
bank was organized, and subject to alterations or repeal, the same as any other
part of the general system."
In the Penn. College cases, 13 Wall., p. 190, Mr. Justice Clifford uses this lan¬
guage: " Charters of private corporations are regarded as executed contracts
between the government and the corporators, and the rule is well settled that
the legislature cannot repeal, impair or alter such a charter against the consent,
or without the default of the corporation, judicially ascertained and declared.
Of course these remarks appty only to acts of incorporation which do not con¬
tain any reservations or provisions annexing conditions to the charter, modify¬
ing and limiting the nature of the contract. Cases often arise where the legis¬
lature, in granting an act of incorporation for a private purpose, either make
the duration of the charter conditional, or reserve to the state the power to alter,
modify or repeal the same at pleasure. Where such a provision is incorporated
in the charter it is clear that it qualifies the grant, and that subsequent exercise
of that reserved power, cannot be regarded as an act within the prohibition of
the constitution."
In the case of Tomlinson v. Jessup, 15 Wall, p. 454, the Northeastern Rail¬
road Company was incorporated in 1851 by the legislature of the state of North
Carolina. At that time there was a general law of the state, passed in 1841, pro¬
viding that the charter of every corporation should be subject to amendment, al¬
teration or repeal by the legislature. In 1855 an act was passed by which the
stock of the company and its real estate should be exempted from taxation, dur¬
ing the continuance of the charter, which was for the term of fifty years. In< 1868
13
a constitute on was adopted, in which it was provided that the property of all
corporations should he subject to taxation. Jessup, a stockholder in the roadr
filed a bill to restrain the state officers from levying a tax on the property of the
road. The court held that the reservation of the power, to alter, contained in,
the Jaw of 1841 affected the the entire relation between the state and corpora¬
tion, and placed under legislative control all rights, privileges and immunities-
derived by the charter from the state, and Mr. Justice Field, in delivering the
opinion of the court, uses this language: " It is true that the charter of the com¬
pany, when accepted by the corporators, constituted a contract between them
and the state, and that the amendment, when accepted, formed a part of the con¬
tract from that date, and was of the same obligatory character, and it may be
equally true, as stated by counsel, that the exemption from taxation added great¬
ly to the value of the stock of the company and induced the plaihtiff to purchase
the shares held by him, but these considerations cannot be allowed any weight
in determining the validity of the subsequent taxation. The power reserved in
the state by the law of 1841, authorized any change in the contract as it origi¬
nally existed, or as subsequently modified, or its entire revocation. The original
corporators or subsequent stockholders took their interests with knowledge of
the existence of this power and of the possibility of its exercise at any time in the
discretion of the legislature."
The case of Miller v. State, 15 Wall., p. 478, was where a railroad company
was organized under the general laws of the state of New York, whose consti¬
tution had a similar clause to our own, as to alteration and repeal. By the
original charter of the company a capital of $800,000 was provided for, to build
a road fifty miles in length. The city of Rochester was authorized by law to
subscribe for $300,000 of the capital stock, and was to have the right, by the act
of the legislature, to appoint four out of the thirteen directors of the company.
All but 18 miles of the road was abandoned, and the legislature afterwards
passed an act, authorizing the city of Rochester to appoint seven directors, that
being a majority of the whole number, and this last act was assailed as impair¬
ing the obligation of contracts. The courts of New York held the act consti¬
tutional, and the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed the decision,
citing and approving the language above quoted from 13 Wallace.
These cases have been cited with some particularity of detail, because they
construe and apply this reservation of power to a variety of cases, and seem to
cover and meet, to a great degree, all the objections which have been urged
against the validity of the law under consideration. Other similar cases might
be added, and the elementary writers cited as being in accord with the doctrine
of these decisions, but the opinion of Chancellor Kent will only be given as
expressed in his Commentaries. Vol. 2, page 396, he says: " and though the va¬
lidity of the alteration or repeal of a charter in consequence of such a reserva¬
tion may not be legally questionable, yet it may become a matter of serious-
consideration in many cases, how far the exercise of such a power could be
consistent with justice or policy. If a charter be granted and accepted with
that reservation, there seems to be no ground to question the validity and effi¬
ciency of the reservation."
To this should perhaps be added the case of Olcott v. Supervisors of Fond du
Lac County, 16 Wall, p 694, which, while not turning on the construction or
effect of the reserved power of alteration or repeal, yet is referred to in this
emphatic language: "That the legislature of Wisconsin may alter or repeal the
charter granted to the Sheboygan & Fond du Lac Railroad Company is certain.
This is a power reserved by the constitution. The railroad can therefore be
controlled and regulated by the state, its use can be defined, its tolls and rates
for transportation may be limited''''—precisely what chapter 273 undertakes to do,
and which the Supreme Court of the United States declares may be done, and
done under and by virtue of the constitutional reservation.
It is, I understand, conceded by all who have given opinions hostile to this
legislation, that, by virtue of the constitutional reservation, all acts of incorpo¬
ration may be absolutely repealed and the corporations created by them dis¬
solved. If the legislature can thus wholly destroy every corporation it has cre¬
ated, and compel a total surrender of all franchises and privileges, and of all
power to transact business, except such as may be necessary to convert its prop¬
erty into money and wind up its affairs, it seems difficult to urge any valid rea¬
son against legislation which merely limits the corporate power and restricts the
privilege of charging higher rates for transportation than the legislature may
14
deem just and equitable. But it is now claimed by those who propose to disre¬
gard the law of 1874, that although the power reserved in the constitution to al¬
ter all acts creating corporations is in terms unlimited, this reserved power is
still subject to certain latent limitations which it is the duty of the courts to
recognize and define; that among the latent limitations one is to be found or
•created which prevents the legislature from reducing the charges for transport¬
ing passengers and freight below a reasonable compensation.
The result of this doctrine would be practically to repeal the constitution of
the state, so far as this clause is concerned, and to restore to corporations in this
vital particular that exemption from legislative control secured to them by the
Dartmouth College decision, and to guard against which the clause was incor¬
porated into the constitution of the state.
The power to alter is given, by the constitution, just as clearly as the power
to repeal, and it is difficult to see why a limitation cannot as well be applied to
the one as to the other. If the state may take away the franchise entirely, why
may it not so regulate and control its exercise as to further the public purpose
for which it was bestowed. Ordinarily the greater includes the less; here the
lesser power is given in express terms. The legislature may " alter," and this
word must be given some signification different in sense or in degree from*the
power to repeal. It cannot be said to apply to the right of taxation and police
regulation, for these are inherent in the state, applicable alike to individuals
and corporations and in no way dependent on the clause of the constitution re¬
ferred to. It must mean that the legislature may in its discretion, instead of
taking the extreme and severe measure of repeal, exercise the lesser and milder
right, and impose such restrictions and conditions upon the conduct of the
affairs of the corporation, and so limit its charges as will best promote the ob¬
ject of its creation and prevent the abuse of the powers and privileges granted
to it.
The corporations cannot justly complain of this. They have accepted their
charters subject to this express reservation, and having so accepted, they hold
them upon the faith of the state only, taking care to deserve its favor or com¬
mand its justice by the manner in which they exercise the power conferred. If
a wrong is done or a mistake made in the exercise of the reserved power, the
aggrieved party must resort to the legislature for redress. This was the agree¬
ment created by the acceptance of the charter and the application for relief
must be made to the tribunal selected by the contracting parties. The courts
cannot interfere, for, says Chancellor Kent, "the legality of the reservation can¬
not be questioned." Should the legislature refuse or fail to correct the wrong, no
worse results could ensue to the corporation than would have followed from ab¬
solute repeal. But it is hardly to be supposed that the legislature would fail to
respond to any application founded in justice. The people cannot fail to appre¬
ciate the necessity of railroads to the business and industrial interests of the
state and to the convenience and prosperity of all its citizens. They do not de¬
sire any unwilling or uncompensated service from the railroads, nor will they
consent that the state should be placed in a condition of servitude to the corpo¬
rations."
But if this limitation, that the rates fixed by the legislature must be reasona¬
ble, exist at all, it arises, not from the reservation or its construction, but rather
out of the common law rule that in the absence of any legislative enactment on
the subject, common carriers are bound to carry all freight and passengers
which are offered at reasonable rates, and cannot discriminate unjustly between
shippers. In my judgment it is impracticable to adply this common law rule
to railroad corporations, as a substitute for legislative control and regulation.
The use of railroads has increased the business of transporting freight and
passengers to immense proportions; it has brought about great and radical
changes in the commerce and business of the country; it has created new and
diverted old channels of trade, built cities and formed states. The gigantic
corporations controlling the railrpads of the country, with their great wealth
and influence are practically placed beyond the reach of the common law obli¬
gation and this warrants the position that legislative control ought to be and is
put in the place of this common law liability of common carriers. Besides, a
suit by the individual to enforce the common law liability settles nothing. No
general rule can be established in a single suit, while such a suit would involve
n inquiry and determination of the cost of the road and its equipment, the
perating expenses, the amount and character of the business, and the whole
15
■detail of the condition, management and relative cost of everything connected
with the road. When this is done the reasonableness of the charge in every
other instance remains open to be litigated at such an expenditure of time and
money as to deter individuals from entering such a field of hopeless litigation.
I am led to the conclusion that the better view is that the judgment of the
legislature is by the reservation of power, and the necessities of the case, the
measure of the reasonableness of the regulation imposed. The corporation cer¬
tainly cannot arbitrarily determine the question, and on the assumption that the
rates are unreasonable disregard the law. The legislative act is conclusive that
the rate is reasonable. The exercise of the power is of itself an assertion of its
justice and of its necessity. The railroads cannot question it; the courts may
not review it, for by the agreement of the parties in accepting the charters
under the reservation, the whole subject is withdrawn from the domain of judi¬
cial decision and remains only a matter for the legislative conscience.
And so with the objection that the provisions ot this law assume control of
the property of the corporation, and deprives them of its use without making
any compensation, and is therefore in conflict with the constitution of the State
and of the United States.
As these corporations have no natural existence, but are created wholly by
legislative enactments, their power to act, in every particular, is derived from the
state; their capacity to make contracts, acquire and use property, and to
•charge for its use comes from the state, and is granted on such terms and to
.such extent as the legislature may prescribe; the power of the state to gi ant is
given by the constitution and coupled with this power is found in the same fun¬
damental law, the authority to alter the act of incorporation as the legislature
may think the public intereste demand. The rights and privileges conferred
cannot be separated from the restrictions and duties imposed. The power to
take toll cannot be distinguished from the duty to take only such as the legisla¬
ture shall establish. It is difficult to see how restricting these tolls within cer¬
tain limits which the legislature deems just, is any more depriving the corpora¬
tions of their property than it would be to repeal their charters and thus deprive
them of the power of charging any rates at all, and this latter power mr.y con¬
fessedly be exercised without making compensation. Whether the state can
compel the companies to operate their roads for such compensation as it chooses
to prescribe, is another and different question, not involved in this discussion.
The only inquiry, while companies are openly violating the law by charging
higher rates than it allows is, as to the power of the legislature to prohibit them
from charging above certain fixed rates.
If it shall be made to appear that the companies cannot operate their roads
except at a loss under the rates fixed by the law, the remedy is not in an attitude
of open hostility to the law; but in an application to the legislature for its
modification. As suggested in relation to the other objection, this is the forum
which the constitution has provided for the determination of that question, and
in accepting the charters, the companies assented to be governed and bound by
the legislative sense of justice. This sense of justice will undoubtedly coincide
with the mutual interest of the people and of the railroad companies. These in¬
terests demand, with a force almost equal to the provisions of positive law, that
remunerative rates shall be allowed for the services of these corporations; but as
a mere question of legal right, full power has been reserved by the constitution,
in the language of Olcott v. Supervisors, supra, to alter or repeal the charters of
these corporations, and the roads can therefore be controlled and regulated by
the state, their use can be defined, and their tolls and rates for transportation
limited.
But it is also claimed that the reserved power to interfere is confined to con¬
tracts made by the state with the corporation, and can have no application to
such as are made by the companies with bona fide creditors, The latter are said
to be within the protection of the constitution of the United States, which pro¬
hibits the passage of any law impairing the obligation of contracts.
The views already expressed apply somewhat to this objection, but the direct
and obvious answer is that the creditor contracts with the corporation precisely
as the corporation contracts with the State, and both must take notice of, and
are bound by the conditions and reservations in the charter.
The courts will read the contract with the creditor, as if the legislative con¬
ditions were printed therein in full. The charter is granted by the State and
accepted by the corporation, and the creditor contracts with it subject to the
16
power of the grantor to alter or impair the obligation. No right can vest, for it
is agreed by both the grantee and the creditor that none shall vest. The cred¬
itor makes his investment cum onere, and cannot complain that the alteration of
the charter impairs his obligation, because by its terms it admits of the very
alteration imposed. It may be folly for the creditor to invest, in view of this
possible interference, but he assents to the terms and takes the risk of just such
interference. The creditor gains no right which the company did not possess,
and the state surrenders none of the power it had reserved. A mortgagee stands
in no dillerent relation in this respect, than any other creditor. The extent of
the mortgage lien is to be measured by the interest of the mortgagor in the
property to which the lien attaches, and the courts will not by construction so-
enlarge the lien as to relieve it from the burdens or restrictions to which it is
subject—much less will they give to the mortgage such sancity and force as to
repeal a fundamental law of the state, or essentially change its meaning and
intent.
The examination of these questions and the principles governing them might
be further extended, but it seems hardly necessary. The conclusion reached is
that said chapter 273 is not obnoxious to any of the objections urged against it,
but is a constitutional enactment, and as such entitled to obedience.
A. SCOTT SLOAN,
Attorney General.
/
CLASSIFICATION OF ROADS,
AND RATES OF FARE AND FREIGHT.
Office of Railroad Commissioners,
Madison, May 14, 1874..
To any Individual, Company or Corporation, owning, operating, managing or
leasings, any Railroador part of a Railroad in the State of Wisconsin :
Notice is Hereby Given by the undersigned, Railroad Commissioners
for the State of Wisconsin, appointed in pursuance of Chap. 273 of the General
Laws of said State, approved March 11, 1874, that the following Classification
of Railroads, Classification of Freights, maximum Rates of Fare, and maximum
Rates of Freight, have been established by law, and by said Commissioners
in pursuance of authority conferred upon said Commissioners by said act:
classification of roads.
Class A—All Railroads, or parts of Railroads, in the State of Wisconsin,
now owned, operated, managed or leased, either by the Milwaukee & St. Paul
Railway Company, the Chicago & Northwestern Railway Company, or the
Western Union Railway Company.
Class B—All Railroads, or parts of Railroads, owned, operated, managed
or leased by the Wisconsin Central Railway Company, the Green Bay & Minne¬
sota Railway Company, or the West Wisconsin Railway Company.
Class C—All Railroads, or parts of Railroads, in this State, not herein¬
before enumerated.
classification of freight.
All freights hereafter transported upon any Railroad, or part of Railroad, in
this State, are divided into four General Classes, to be designated as First,
Second, Third and Fourth Classes, and into seven Special Classes, to be desig¬
nated D, E, F, G, H, I, J.
GENERAL CLASSES.
Said four General Classes shall include all merchandise and other articles of
transportation, included in the standard Classification of the Milwaukee & St.
Paul Railway Company, which took effect December 1st, 1873, and at this date
used by said Company for all business done in Wisconsin, except such articles
2
18
as are hereinafter assigned in accordance with law to Special Classes hereinafter
named.
SPECIAL CLASSES.
The Special Classes hereinafter named shall include the following articles,
respectively:
D—All Grain, in car loads.
E—- Flour in lots of fifty bbls., or more; Lime in lots of twenty-four bbls., or
more.
E—Salt in lots of 60 bbls., or more; Cement, Water-Lime and Stucco, in
lots of twenty four bbls., or more.
G—Lumber, Lath and Shingles, in car loads.
H—Live Stock, in car loads.
1—Agricultural Implements, Furniture and Wagons.
J—Coal, Brick, Sand, Stone, and heavy Fourth Class articles, in car loads.
RATES OF FARE AND FREIGHT.
LIMITATION OF CHARGES FOR FARES.
Any Individual, Company or Corporation owning, operating, managing or
leasing any Railroad, or part of a Railroad, in the Classification of Roads herein¬
before prescribed, is limited to a compensation for the transportation of any
person, with ordinary baggage not exceeding one hundred pounds in weight, as
follows :
Class A—Three cents j>er mile.
Class B—Three and one-half cents fer mile.
Class C—Four cents fier mile.
Provided, That no such Individual, Company, or Corporation, hereinbefore
designated, shall charge, demand or received any greater compensation per
mile for the transportation of children of the age of twelve years, or under, than
one-half the respective rates above prescribed.
LIMITATION OF CHARGES FOR FREIGHT ON RAILROADS CLASSED A AND B.
No Individual, Company or Corporation owning, operating, managing or
leasing any Railroad mentioned in Classes A and B, is entitled to charge for, or
receive, a greater or higher rate for carrying any freight belonging to either of
the four General Classes of freight hereinbefore named, than was charged for
carrying freights now belonging to said tour General Classes, on said Railroad,
on the first day of June, 1873.
Nor is any Individual, Company or Corporation owning, operating, manag¬
ing, or leasing any Railroad belonging to said Classes A and B, entitled to charge
for, or receive, a greater or higher rate for carrying articles belonging to any of
the Special Classes hereinbefore named than is specified in the annexed table:
19
Railroads "A" and "B,"'—Freight Tariff—Special Classes.
"O
rt
O
i-l
w
a!
u
o
100 Lbs.
06
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
*9
20
21
22
22K
23
23^
24
_D .15
-Q J2
0 c
°j 6
u
o o
§3
o
fvg
U | c/3
o i- -»-»
DO
*" 4-t —«
(/) ^ 2
„£} """'
^ - <J
ts u
C 3
| o ^
\^4
L2 . rt-5
I • »-»-Q
! C ^ a; .
''Z o E w
Bbl.
Bbl.
12
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
45
46
47
48
15
21
22K
24^
26
28
29M
3iK
33
35
36^
38^
40
42
43 K
45K
47
49
5oM
*2^
54
56
G
I
.£
12
co .
(/)
"a
C 03
OS o
rt rt
Jcj
tT c
a; •-
r
S(/3
<U
a- '
H-i
W)
Car.
H
-o
oS
O
h-3
u
03
(J
.£
u
o
■Ui
CO
D
>
Car.
8.00
13.00
I
I4-5°j
15.00
16.50
I7°°i
18.50
19.001
T9-5°j
21.00
22.5o1
23. oo'
24.50
25.00
26.50
27.00
28:50
29.00
30 50
31 - °°
32-50
33 00
c 5
v o
E g
&
E -13
1—1 a
—. rt
«>
u v
3 a
.E £
Car.
M 3 ™
™ on
» C!
^ >v.5
o > -
•n « ft
PQ E —
M -c o
f—T"rt "■*-»
03 c M
o§<J
Car.
10.00
17 -ooj
19.00'
21.00
23.00'
25.00
27. ooj
29-OOj
31.00
33 ooj
35 00,
37-oOj
39-00
41 .OOj
43 - oo'
« |
45 • °o
47.00
|
49 • °°|
51.00
53 00
55-oo|
57-oo,
11.00
I7-°°1
18.50
20.00
21.50,
23.001
24.50
26 :oo!
27 • 5°|
29.00
30.50!
32.00'
33-5o
35-ooj
36 • 5°,
38.00
39-5o
41.00
42.50,
44. oo1
45-5o|
47.00
8.00
14.00
15.00
16.50
I7-50
19.00
20.00
21.50
22.50
24.00
25.00
26.50
27.50
29.00
30.00
31 -5°
32,5°
3400
35-oo
36-5°
37-5o
39.00
When rates are not shown in the above Table for the exact distance, the
rates given for the next greater distance should be used.
In all cases, distances are to be computed from localties where freight is re¬
ceived, notwithstanding it may pass from one Railroad to another.
LIMITATION OF CHARGES FOR FREIGHT ON RAILROADS CLASSED C.
No Individual, Company or Corporation owning, operating, managing or
leasing any Railroad mentioned in Class C, is entitled to chaige or receive a
greater or higher rate for carrying any freight belonging to either the General
or Special Classes hereinbefore designated, than was charged for carrying such
freight on said Railroad on the first day of June, 1873.
20
PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF THE LAW.
Chapter 273, of the General Laws of 1874, entitled "An Act relating to
Railroads, Express, and Telegraph Companies, in the State of Wisconsin," in
pursuance of which Act the above Classification of Roads, Classification of
Freights, and Rates of Fare and Freights are established, provides as follows:
Section 6. In no instance shall any such individual, company or corporation, lessee or other person
charge or receive any greater rate or compensation for carrying freight or passengers than hereinbefore
provided, and any individual, company or corporation violating, or in any way evading the provisions of
this act, shall forfeit all right to recover or receive any compensation whatever for the service rendered
wherein such violation is attempted, and every agent of any such corporation, lessee, or other individual
operating any railroad within this state who shall refuse to receive for transportation over the road for
which he is agent, in the usual way, any of the articles hereinbefore mentioned on account of the com¬
pensation hereinbefore prescribed being too low, or, receiving any such articles of freight, shall charge or
attempt to charge for the transportation of the same, any greater sum than herein fixed, or shall in any
manner violate or attempt to violate or evade the provisions of this act, shall be deemed guilty of a mis¬
demeanor, and on conviction thereof shall pay a fine of not exceeding two hundred dollars for each and
every offense, and the injured party shall have a right of action against said agent, or against the rail¬
road company or other persons operating the railroad, or both, in which he shall be entitled to recover
three times the amount taken or received from him in excess of the rates prescribed by this act.
Section 7. Justices of the peace shall have concurrent jurisdiction with the circuit court in all prose¬
cutions for violation of this act, with full power and authority to impose fines, and to the same extent as
the circuit court ; and the defendant shall have the right of appeal as in other cases tried before justices
of the peace, and justices of the peace shall also have jurisdiction in all civil cases under this act when¬
ever the amount claimed does not exceed two hundred dollars.
NOT APPLIABLE TO THROUGH FREIGHTS.
Nothing contained in this notice is intended in any manner to abridge or
control the rates for freight charged by any Railroad, or Company, in this State,
" for carrying freight which comes from beyond the boundaries of the State, and
to be carried across or through the State.''
JOSEPH H. OSBORN,
GEO. H. PAUL,
JOHN W. HOYT,
Railroad Commissioners.
Attest :
H. A. TENNEY,
Clerk 0/ the Board.
COMPLAINT—TRANSPORTATION OF PASSENGERS.
Chapter 273, Laws of 1874.
STATE OF WISCONSIN, )
County of . J '
, being duly sworn and examined on oatb before the undersigned, a
(!) , in and for said county, deposes and says: That on the day of
A. D. 1874, the Railway Company, owned, operated, or managed a railroad,
or part of a railroad, in the state of Wisconsin, between the of in the
county of , Wisconsin, and the of in the county of , Wiscon¬
sin. (2) . That on the said day of , 1S74, wras an agent
of said company, duly authorized by it to charge and receive compensation for
the transportation of passengers over said railroad, or part of railroad, and that
said did, on said day of , 1874, at said of , in said
county of , Wisconsin, as such agent, and being then and there so author¬
ized by said company, as aforesaid, wrongfully, unlawfully and willfully charge
and receive from , for the transportation of as a passenger
with ordinary baggage, not exceeding one hundred pounds in weight, over said
railroad, or part of railroad, from the said of , in the county of ,
Wisconsin, which is a distance by said railroad, or part of a railroad, of
miles, and no more, a greater and higher rate and compensation than three cents
per mile, to-wit: the sum of dollars and cents, contrary to the statute
in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the state,
and complainant prays that the said may be arrested and dealt with
according to law.
(Complainant sign on this line.)
Subscribed and sworn to, and complainant examined on oath before me, this
day of 1874. *
(Magistrate to sign on this line officially.)
"Note C1)-—Tnsert official character of Magistrate as "Justice of the Peace," " Police Justice,"
"Municipal Judge," as thecase may be; if ihe Magistrate is a Police Justice or Municipal Judge
give proper descriptionot his jurisdictional precinct, as "Police Justice in and for the City of
, in said county."
Note (2).—In case the complaint is against an agent of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul
Railway Company, insert here "that the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company
then was an I for a long time theretofore had been, and still is commonly known and called un¬
der its former name of the Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway Company, and is by that name men¬
tioned and designated in section one of chapter 273 of the Laws of 1874, of this state."
22
COMPLAINT—TRANSPORTATION OF FREIGHT.
Chapter 273, Laws of 1874.
Btate of Wisconsin, )
County of . j '
, being duly sworn and examined on oath before the undersigned,
a(!) , in and for said county, deposes and says; That on the day of ,
A. D. 1874, the Railroad Company, owned, operated or managed a railroad
or part of a railroad, in the state of Wisconsin, between the of in the
county of , Wisconsin, and the of , in the county of , Wisconsin.
(5) . That on the said day of 1874, was an agent of said
company, duly authorized by it to charge and receive compensation for the
transportation of freight over said railroad, or part of railroad, and that said
did, on said day of , 1874, at said of , in said county of
, Wisconsin, as such agent, and being then and there so authorized by said
company, as aforesaid, wrongfully, unlawfully and willfully charge and receive
from , for the transportation of (3) , over said railroad, or part of
railroad, from the said of , in the county of , Wisconsin, which is
a distance by said railroad, or part of a railroad, ol miles, and no more, a
greater and higher rate and compensation than (4) to-wit: the sum of
dollars and cents, contrary to the statute in such case made and provided,
and against the peace and dignity of the state, and complainant prays that the
said may be arrested and dealt with according to law.
(Complainant sign on this line),
Subscribed and sworn to, and complainant examined on oath before me, this
— day of , 1874.
(Magistrate to«sign on this line officially),
Note (L)—Insert official character of Magistrate as "Justice of the Peace," " Police Justice,"
44 Municipal Judge," as ttie case may be; if the Magistrateis a Police Justice or Municipal Judge
give proper description of his jurisdictional precinct, as "Police Justice in and ior the City of
• , in said county."
Note (3.)—In case the complaint is against an agent of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul
Railway Company, insert hi re "that the said Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company
then was, and lor a long time theretofore had been, and still is commonly known and called un¬
der its former name of the Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company, and is by that name men¬
tioned and designated in section one of chapter 273 of the Laws of 1874, of this state."
Note (3.)—Here state the articles carried, as" one car load of lumber."
Note (*.)—Here insert the legal rate as fixed by chapter 273, as " eight dollars per car load for
the first 23 miles, and not exceeding five doLars for the second 25 miles,'1 and so on, following
the language of the act.
v Note (5.)—If the articles do not come within the special c'asses fixed by the act, but in one of
the four general clauses, then change the allegation in Note 4, and insert, " than was charged
for carrying said articles by said railroad on the first day of June, 1873."
23
TABLE OF DISTANCES
ON LINES OF RAILWAYS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF WISCONSIN.
MILWAUKEE & ST. PAUL RAILWAY.
PRAIRIE DU CHIEN DIVISION.
MILWAUKEE TO
Dist.
Dist.
Dist.
5.5
Wauwatosa.
63.7
MiUon Junction.
138.9
Lone Rock.
9.9
Elm Grove.
70.8
Edgerton.
1454
Avoca.
14.4
Brookfleld Junction.
80.5
S'oughton.
151.3
Muscoda.
17.0
Forest House.
89.1
McFarland.
157.7
Blue River. .
20.6
Waukesha.
95.7
Madison.
165.8
Boscobel.
28.7
Genesee.
102.3
Middleton.
171.7
Woodman.
31.4
North Prairie.
110.3
Cros* Plains.
175.7
Wauzeka.
36.6
Eagle.
115.1
Black Earth.
182.9
Wright's Ferry.
42.4
Palmyra.
118.5
Mazomanie.;
186.3
Bridgeport.
50.7
Whitewater.
124.6
Arena.
193.5
PliAIKIE DU Chien.
66.5
Lima.
130.1
Helena.
62.2
Milton.
132.3
Spring Green.
MONROE BRANCH.
MILWAUKEE TO
Dist.
Dist.
Dist.
71.4
Janesville.
83.6 Orford.
96.3
Juda.
77.9
Hanover.
89.8 Brodhead.
105.1
Monroe.
r
LA CROSSE DIVISION.
MILWAUKEE TO
Dist.
Dist.
Dist.
8.8
Elm Grove.
63.5
Columbus.
138.4
Orange.
13.2
Brookfleld Junction.
67.0
Fall River.
147.0
Le Roy.
19.2
Pewaukee.
73.5
Otsego.
153.2
Tom ah Junction.
23.7
Hartland.
77.6
Rio.
156.9
Greenfield.
26.4
Nashotali.
82.7
Wyocena.
16c. 8
Lafayette.
31.3
Ocononiowoc.
91.6
Portage.
170.0
Sparta.
37.0
Ixonia.
100.5
Lewiston.
174.2
Horsey ville.
43.9
Watertown.
108.5
Kilbourn City.
180.1
Bangor.
44.7
Waiertown Junction.
117.1
Lyndon.
184.7
West Salem.
49.0
Rich wood.
124.3
Lemonweir.
192.0
Winona Junction.
54.3
Lowell.
127.6
Mauston.
195.5
La Crosse.
59.6
Elba.
134.7
New Lisbon.
Dist.
9.1
15.2
20.5
25.1
30.2
32.6
36.9
41.5
45.6
47.3
53.8
59.0
Schwartzburg.
Granville.
Germantown.
Richfield.
Ark< rville.
Schleisingerville.
Hartford.
Rubicon.
Woodland.
Iron Ridge.
Horicon Junction.
Burnett Junction.
MILWAUKEE TO
Dist.
68.4 Waupun.
75.7 Brandon.
79.9 Reed's Cornets.
83 4 Ripon.
90.0 Picket's.
94.0 Fisk's.
98.0 Fitzgerald.
103.0 Oshkosta.
89.5 Rusk Lake Junction.
96.2 Berlin.
Dist. .
98.7 Omro.
103.7 Winneconnee.
56.7 Minnet-ota Junction.
58.6 Rolling Prairie.
63.5 Beaver Dam.
69.4 Fox Lake Junction.
71.4 Fox Lake.
94.6 Waukau.
74.5 Randolph.
79.9 Cambria.
89.6 Pardeeville.
98.0 Portage.
MILWAUKEE AND CHICAGO DIVISION.
Dist.
1.8 Kinnickinnic.
7.1 Lake
12.2 Oakwood.
MILWAUKEE TO
Dist.
19.0 Franksville.
Racine.
23 .2 Western Union Junction.
Dist.
27.5 Burr Oak.
32.4 TruesdelJ.
33.4 Kenosha Junction.
24
MILWAUKEE AND WATERTOWN DIVISION.
Dist.
8.8 Elm Grove.
18.2 Brook field Junction.
19.2 Pewaukee.
23.7 Hartland.
26.4 Nashoiah.
31.3 Oconomowoc.
MILWAUKEE TO
Dist.
37.0 Txonia.
43.9 Watertown.
44.7 Watertown Junction.
53.8 Hubbletun.
57.8 Waterloo.
Dist.
61.2 Marshall.
63.5 Deansville.
69.2 Sun Prairie.
74.0 Burke.
81.2 Madison.
MADISON AND PORTAGE RAILROAD.
Dist.
7.0 Sanderson.
11.5 Windsor.
13.8 DeForrest.
MADISON TO
Dist.
16.3 Morrison.
21.4 Arlington.
25.4 Poyuette.
Dist.
28.2 Hartman.
33.5 Pacific.
39.0 Portage.
WESTERN UNION RAILROAD.
Dist.
10 Windsor.
15 Union Grove.
18 Kansasville.
21 Dover.
27 Burlington.
RACINE TO
Dist.
31 Lyos.
34 Springfield.
41 Elkhorn.
46 Delavan.
Diet.
50 Darien.
53 Aliens Grove.
59 Clinton.
69 Beloit.
CHICAGO & NORTHWESTERN RAILWAY
Dist.
2.3 Marinette.
9.3 Peshtigo.
13.5 Cavoir1 s.
22.7 Oconto.
27.7 Pensaukee.
31.7 Brookside.
36.9 Little Snamico.
42.7 BigSuamico.
46.8 Duck Creek.
51.4 Fort Howard.
57.4 De Pere.
63.1 Little Kaukana.
67.4 Wrightstown.
73.1 Kaukana.
Dist.
5 Westport.
10 Waunakee.
15 Dane.
20 Lodi.
26 Merrimac.
Dist.
5 Syene.
10 Oregon.
16 Brooklyn.
MENOMONEE TO
Dist .
75.1 Little Chute.
80.1 Appleton.
85.1 West Menasha.
86.9 Menasha and Neenah.
91.2 Snells.
95.3 State Hospital.
100.1 Oshkosh.
109.1 Vandyne.
116.9 Fond du Lac.
125.3 Oakfield.
128.4 Oak Center.
133.4 Chester.
141.7 Burnett.
MADISON TO
Dist.
37 Baraboo.
43 Blooms.
46 Ablemans.
53 Reedsburg.
MADISON TO
Dist.
22 Evansville.
27 Magnolia.
31 Footviile.
Dist.
145.4 Minnesota Junction.
148.6 Juneau.
155.4 Clyman.
163.5 Watertown.
171.7 Johnsons Creek.
177.0 Jefferson.
182.7 Fort Atkinson.
189.5 Ko8hkonong.
194.5 Milton Junction.
202.5 Janesville.
211.2 Shopiere.
215.2 Clinton Junction^
222.8 Sharon.
Dist.
60 La Yalle.
67 Wonownc.
70 Union Center.
74 Elroy.
Dist.
34 Hanover.
40 Aft on.
48 Beloit.
NORTHWESTERN UNION RAILROAD..
Dist.
3l/2L. S. Junction.
14 Granville.
21 Geimantown.
26 Jackson.
MILWAUKEE TO
Dist.
33 West Bend.
34 Barton.
40 Kewaskum.
Dist.
47 New Cassel.
54 Eden.
62 Fond du Lac.
WEST WISCONSIN RAILROAD.
ST. PAUL TO
Dist.
Dist.
'
Dist.
19.9
Hud&on.
65.7
Menomonee.
132.9
Green Bay Junction..
23.4
North. Wis. Junction.
70.2
Rusk.
136.4
Wright's.
31.4
Boardman.
78.0
Elk Mound.
144.6
Black River Falls.
37.9
New Richmond.
86.8
West E tu Claire.
160.9
Rudd's.
31.3
Roberts.
88.8
Eau Claire.
165.3
Warren's.
37.3
Hammond.
100.9
Fall Creek.
168.0
Lowery's.
40.5
Baldwin.
110.9
Augusta.
172.3
Wisconsin Yal. Juncti'n
49.0
Hergey.
120.2
Fairchiid.
184.0
Camp Douglass.
52 1
Wilson.
127.1
Humbird.
197.4
Elroy.
56.9
Knapp.