Stockton & Visalia Railroad v. City of Stockton

Good Law
51 Cal. 328
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 1, 1876No. 4511California2,370 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Niles, J.

This is an application for a mandamus to compel the delivery to the petitioner of certain bonds of the city of Stockton, issued under the act of April 1, 1870 (Stats. 1869-70, p. 551), and placed in the hands of the trustees named in the tenth section of the act. The petitioner claims to have performed the conditions upon which .it was to become entitled to the bonds under the terms of the act. This is denied by the respondents, who resist the application on the ground, first, that the portion of the road lying between the city of Stockton and Peters, 14J miles in length, was not constructed by the petitioner, but by another railroad company, by which it was sold and conveyed to the petitioner. Second, that the road as located and built does not pursue the route prescribed by the act. There are several minor objections, which, however, may be considered under these two general heads.

First. It is clear from the whole act, that the purpose of the subsidy was to aid the railroad company in establishing railroad communication from the water front in Stockton, “through the county of San Joaquin and up the San Joaquin Valley, in the direction of the town of Visalia, county of Tulare.”…

dissent Opinion

McKinstry, J.

dissenting:

The reargument of this cause has not changed the views expressed by us in the opinion heretofore rendered, and it will stand as the opinion of the court.

Judgment and order reversed, and cause remanded, with an order to the court below to issue a peremptory writ of mandate as prayed for.

Remittitur forthwith.

dissent Opinion

Rhodes, J.

dissenting:

In my opinion the judgment and order should be affirmed.

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.