"
LONERGAN V. MISSISSt1'PI RIVER BRIDGE 00.
777
LONEIttlAN
v.
MISSrSSIPPIRlVEIt BRIDGE CO.' l
{OiriJuit(Jourt, E.,J).·;Mtssouri.
OF
DIKE' IN ''
-..:
LANDS""':'
'INJURING FERRY' FRANCHISE.
Suit to recover damages fnl'iiJpJuries allegeli to ha,ve,l!een,dllJ;le to to a qy of a' in tll? 1;11 the qefEmdan tHeld, (1)' that plainti:ff had; urldertlie laws of illinois,' and 'aCcording ,to the: evidence;;nociltle t()j thelahds, lor .llljuri to ,which the guit :W1J.S! tlu!-t tb,e act granting, a ,cllarter for a which the plaintiff claims, the e.nyright to'cohtrol the chamiel of the, to prevent its imprOvemeh't; compen$8tion to him by the Unit1l(i8tates.,' " ) ,: 't,,' follo:wed.;:[
or
(,:, for'plaiI1tiff. " R. Kern, 'for' ' : ' , C; i,' (orally .j:' plaintiff 'defendant recover inftuy' alleged 'to have 'been done to certain lands ltildtp· a 'certain 'ferry franchise by reason 'of theconstructioii of It certain dike in 'the'Yississippi riverbj By an of congress approved M!trch 3, 1871, river at the erection of'it railway Louisiana, was whillh biidge" was: to be builtundet and:accoidiI1g to'stichregulations for the security of the navigation of the river as the se.cretary of war should prescribe. 16 St. at Large, 473. · The secretary of war, in pursuance of the recommendation of 'it board of engUieers, rElquired the erection of too dike in'question for the 'oetter iniprovennent of the n:avigati6h'of thet'iver. The bridge nected· great by· rail,terminating oJ? th'e, river: ", ' ,,", 'i The plaintiff allegesthat'the of thee'rec\i6n of the dike was to injure lands beldrlgfng"to 'him a:djoiiiing the river, and also to impair the value of his ferry franchise, under which he was authorized to run a ferry across the Mississippi river at Louisiana. The question is, can he recover?' This identical controversy has been before the courts of Illi-
'D. P.
to,
(,.,
,c
" ,
778 nois, and the supreme court of that state, in an elaborate material questio?: ip"the case opinion, has decided adversely to the plaintiff. Mississippi River Bridge Co. v. LonIn that caSe it was 'held-Ji'i1"st, that ergan, 91 IlL' Lonergan ;under the larw,s of Illinois, and according to the evidence, '(which was the same as nl;nvioffered,) no title to the lands, for inj:llry to whi0hthe suit was brought; '8econd, that ,- , aQt ,{: 'thegsneral .,-, 1\ the' ", of" - , . ' . " ", 'B:ssembly of IlliMia, granting a charter fora ferry across t4e.,Mississippi river, under' which act the plaintiff claims, .did, not give the grantee any right to control the the'river, or to :prevent its 'improve. ment, t9,him by'the United States. ,The court, a.aid,: "TheactoCthe legil'llature of, this state, which established the ferry, gave tbeplaintiff 110 right or intereElt whatever'in tlte'flow'df the tiver."'Updn theseproposiI" am to the tions, which are conclusive of opinion that this court is bound to foiiow, 'as a of' decision, the :supreme ;oourt of Illinois. ' , , accevted " The first C9urt as a by ·decision of the, statl:l... , He"f!derBon. v. GrYfi,n, 5 Pet.151,',,: ; : ' i l i , < ; i " . ' ' . , The secoIJ,d the Aescription of a judicir.! l;>y: ill the state:of, one of its own istherj;lf9re. upon the)ederal courts. , But,itispot case that this court suprelIl-e court of Illinois, fOf t is boupd by. Jh-e the: opinion of that court above cit\3d,andhav6 co.niid,el·ed theaJ,'gulIl-eIJ.t 0,£ plaintiff's to the vieWql, and my counsel in ,sollnp.' 'itudshouid", be fol· conclusion is'd that ,tl lpW.f;ld upon, the questions discul'lsed. " j t., ,: . .', ,,I, ,.. '., , ' I ',," { . ",._," ,"., · : :
r.,
.I
1;1-
;!;
:"f
!;'\
.... ." . r.:· ) /. ' 'I!:
':1",
i:
'.<1
;"
'10
""') ;i 1
:(Oiz'C'liit'OO,W!'tnWj
:i. "
Tim oc'c1ipaticii cient to give a.g<ilod iftle
bk.
uriderclaim: of 'title': is sum.. of
..
f.
".
;'
.,., '
:.... ,.
brohgM' hi the to' recoyer 'so 'W;:"ro'f-aeution32,tdwtl. it, rarigi' 6 :west",' being Hf 'Cmwf3ru lioUnty;' ;. verse statute: The case J:
; ,;: i ' ,",;, : ;,i Wm,'·B:Jarvis,'forfplainti:ff. 7'7wntriIFitl 'Ptillkr;
" J.'I
:' :" , I. , "
.', '
:'J\
',,) , ati'ltctiollM l ej
,
j:
a:
'his a patent of frofu'the·'Unitoo., States to himself, dated April 16, 1856.:' iTbe susbtiri'hi's case'and sho'W titM ih hiDiself,'ihtlbducea! iBsu'ed;by the county of Ii'
The
in
NoYerrlbErr9; anl'fireCdHi:ed' on day in the riffice of' the' f(j± fflB: ",ford"lcoutxty; deed of the land executed by said Peter ;]j&eblOn; the' grailtee in' 'the' tax' to hltri;''Mohs/Monson;' thb defdndajit, 1'2',<l'Se6:, an'a'lre"tlot'ded :g6i?teMbet27,18t>9;! »It 'appoors fiicJril theteStirlibny:t)f: son Itlta't,
at
'ig"datea:; 'j
grtibbedsOfue::on'tlie yeaiiibniltta sefilfon mdveairi\vith his
intentidti of of ,. $ 14{}; fti' 'lune . possessl0n"'li'nder his
and paid thestim
(18M) land') broke'tl:tid lanai '«rill 'in! N-bfehlber :af 'the saine thet latid.,lahd'iii:OctotJer oltha next
that ''Sihee that'