Cornell University Cornell MineSweeper Vehicle Design Report
Franchises - Cornell University
Transcript of Franchises - Cornell University
Cornell Law LibraryScholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository
Historical Theses and Dissertations Collection Historical Cornell Law School
1892
FranchisesArthur Grant PattersonCornell Law School
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/historical_thesesPart of the Law Commons
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Historical Cornell Law School at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It hasbeen accepted for inclusion in Historical Theses and Dissertations Collection by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A DigitalRepository. For more information, please contact [email protected].
Recommended CitationPatterson, Arthur Grant, "Franchises" (1892). Historical Theses and Dissertations Collection. Paper 268.
Submitted as a Thesis by
Arthu r G raiat Patterson
Qandidata for the Deere of "Bachelor of Laws"
The Cornell Tlniversity,.8chool of La,0lasss of '92.
In ,tLyt studyprpra)t )ry to fr7 tiL1f on t-i s subj ec -,
found the cases, ,d evail tile text books i. hoTel1_ss co.-
fict in re arr to it Tr 13 aCi ses on Real PropO, Ivspealk-
iT of til er a s onae tJiT, whi 1s tre, i se os 0 corporati o" s
an11 par ati arly iu.ni cip al corTorati o.s r eqardinjg tAet s
a very di ffere nt tiinl.
After so-ia, hesi t-.,ti on, cane to the conclu.i o... th t the
., ont cori__ic t in the c sios and .ext books being
largely due to tAhe diversifie .atri.e of franci ses,couid
be to a .re, ex.,en overcoP-D by a classification. And
~tjie i am <,;are tl-hat the cla;si fication adopted is very
cruO .!hink that ib is natura1 one,ai id I trust,,:!ay. surj-
nas-it a recorciliailion of nost of the casos.
in tr iat ~r of t-he subj ect i.stenL of fill-i i Te
paes Wi t, nTljwr ous Ci tati.)s1 of the facts of por ieular
casesI have atteipted to a23, conci C 'S.o S 5t ,,t o f tb ho
.Tenera rinci1les, aid the rea sons v~i c , suppe(rt te, lOp-
ilig by so doingj to cover the ios- imuortant parts of ie
subject in the briefest possible :an..or. A.G.P.
TABLE 011
C.HAIP-'I ' .b I, J'RA i Ii t 1P U+] ;4f1-?AL.
I, 'iThe general nature of franchises Page 5
II, i'ranc! ihsos di stinpui shed L'ro'ri st-,tut ory or oon
ri ght. Page 7
IiI. i-nat which is w franchise in one country may be, a com-
mon right in another.. Page 8
I.,!,]-,at -may be the subject of a franchise. Page 9
V. Goeneral classifications of fr9nch-ises. Page 10
0rpA.PTR ° i I, PRoOPjRTY 1,M'B,'11- IS.
VTI.Definjition and nature of a property franchise. Page 12
VII.Value of property franchises. Pagfe 12
IlI.~The usual liabilities incid(ent to property ovirersihip
and business transactions. Pa qe 13
e courts have not consci E ousy and logical ly di s-
cussed a, d dfined I'ranch-i ses. Page 14
X. Tbe consituent elements of a corpora-ion engaged iii
the merce,rltile business. Paue 15
XI. T IPe rirfht to sue and be sued in the co', iorate na e is
a franchise. Page 17
X-iI.1fIe ri llt to exercise a cont roi in the busin ssby
voting for directors,et'c. ,is not a franchise. Page 18
XIII.Peroetual succession of a corporsrion is not P,
frp, )cli se. Pagre 18
XI V. 9ihe d efi it ion of a corporation. Page 19
XV. Li~iitel right to exercise the porer of emi-nont domain
given. to soIe corpora1iois is a rran chise. Page 21
Y7I. f. epti on frov Lax- aion is a franchi se. Page 21
XTII.UThe rirfht to maintain a thoroughfare and charge tolls
is a franchise. PagTe 22
VII.T:e right to own n pass real propertty in the corpo-
rate nn-:e is sa franchise. Page 22
KI(.Tf Ye rigfL to run P public ferry is a franchise." 23
XXPatent rights are franchises. Page 24
=~I.Oopy rigfhts are franchi-es,also thu righlt o- baak-
i ng etc. Par e24
XXK!I.Pbh state has the right to tax prooerty fralcises
Page 27
XXIII.Francises being a, part of the sovearei gnty of' the
state,cannot be exerci sed rii thout its authorit. Pacre 28
XXI. A state has the povIer iro proti. hi t til , exerci se ,vi th-
iLn its territory, of a, fratclu.ise nrantee by ,).Iy other state
or cou0nry. Page 30
XXV. co, ls ssification of p roperty fran chiseis. Page 31
]CI.( i object of classification Page 32
7XVII,,rancises incidenI, to the transaction of busi,.ess.
Page 32
MXVIII. 1'ranchises -rhich are property rights. Page 3
XKIX.Iphey are subject to the right of eminent domnain by
the state. Page 38
X.XTi.ten they ca..ii be sold or ;nortcTr'ned. Page 34
=CKI.The state by ta-ino, t:his class of franchi ses fro-,
thteir possessors tvi,thou"6 just co.ipensation,'wili be impair-
og thT oligation of contra;ct,unless V]a, right is reserve"
Page 34
Q±AIP.DriI I, POLITICAL iPA'--I S.;-,,.
.XtI.01hat is neant by political franchises. Page 3('
I.IlI.rTh11e rigir to vote is 11otir± 1j.is cou 1try,a fra, n-
cii se. Pa,~ 3;e
=KKIX. Political franchises are posessed by bodies politic,
such Ps T"unicipal c orpOrations. Page 88
1 T.['i'e state has complet e coi.).trol! overla.d po ,,rer to
recall political franc-iss, Pagqe 39
x-=I. IPe exercise of most political franchises are des-
cretionary "vith the pofor possessincf theigand no liability
is incurred by toIe exercise of 1 e discretion. Page 39
XOXII.In certain cases,ir!perative mini61etrial duties are
iTposed on the possessors of political franchises. 40
=D'/IiI.The assumed exercise of a political fraicIhise 'vitLh-
out autiorit.y nakes the act void. Pa ge 40
. )K-_, Conclusi on. Pa, fe 41
Cases,rith references to er, ch section.Pars 48-,l
Chapter I.
Il'he 'Aeneral ,Tature of' Franchises.
I . , -S,] 'R,-\L ) . Jt, I !'I ():: I f f\ I'P,,A! i LI SE
Ir order to cone at a feir un.dersWtndinr, of ;vhat
fr-rmchises areg.nd %;,ihat can be done *Jiith thenour first
inquiry is, rha t is a, fralichise.And a, suitable,an absolute-
l~: correct definition is probebil not to be found in any
text book or decision nor accessible to the studento Tho
may hcave occasion to institute the sea rch.fFevertheless,
some e inient jurists and text book ,iriters hav, e forial , ted
definitions which in the contingencr for wi-ich hey Tere
made,v''TerO sufficiently complete and , ccurate for the pnr-
poses for vrhicb they -rere intende(I.And we,b,,7 comparing tlIes
several definitions,vay like-Tise come to a conclusion suf-
ficiently accurate for present purposes.Je find in the flrst
placegthat a franchise is c,,n ,vn-a-fe,iven to a, ert in
person or perso!sSecon('ly,tht the advantarle is fiiven by
the state in the exercise of a, sovereign poIrer.ThirdlT,
that the benefite conferred_ do not belonr to the subject
of common rights. .Te fi-ij.d f rgThr, by a very crude exemiina-
tiontha; the adverse ature of differn.t fraitc]i ses Flakes
anythinF but a verY coi~prehersive defiriUi on, defec ive as
a qeneral definition$ ,,,hil o on the o--rter h dri, e di f:ii lty
is encountered in f,)rAiLf.(f , feneral r.-finition that will
not incllcle too much.
By Finch it has been defined' to e",Lroyal privileg e,
or a, branch of the kingys prero,,l:,ivesubsistin T i Ja tlhe
hands of his subjects"and he Toe on to s_-, tthat it may
be vested in a natural person~or a bo,.i.> politic.Blackstone
and nert ,,l1 of' the inglish a ubhori, ties,ad opted. Finches
definit, ion.-TowT if in JLngiland,,, privileie 1],. the hands of a
subject, 'hich the kinf. alone could grant ioul( be a fran-
chise; vi tbh us a Drivi Ie re or immuni vhici., can.iot be Te-
gally exercisetl -i thout leTisla-_ive grantmust be a fran-
c,..se.The re fore a, .rs be deLi s. 'f
3-BI,,J -BY L-i4 STPATh ,IF TI. ., T &I, S. ; Cn ij.iS SO. -j:_- ,:
A P,-RSOT OR MJ¢ UIR O1i' POF-,S.-JS; i \Y .A - T 'AN.ib- j -4. F .T
Ti'T, F Pi-,, g'I .,+ 1,, OT A PO bfbR, Th Fl (JI .'Y LJS TO' ±% B I f2 O
'k} S3U]J'O'L (UL CO, I J PlY J N!. fAn~i vs i s Cshi by Chief Justice
i arshal,"ouht not to he exercised b,' private in~liviruals
at their mere nrill and plinasurebut should be preserved
for public contro~l. "
IIH. FPA40i{I SLS DI )I STr-TORI i-1) 1i'PfA SV2AYU'pTY PP .
A fraichise must be the deleg ,Aon of-ohe ri~f-ft to ex-
orcise some po'.rer or privilege which is in fact contrary
to the law of the ]i.nc. And it must of course be sone poT:er
or privilere which the sovereigjn power of the staT, has a
rigTht to deleqfate or create.Franchises are to be distin-
f ished from statutory rigfhts in that the latter is given
to ,.11 thie subjects,t.and thus becomes e, common rightor in
other w.,,ordstbecornes the li-- of the land..To one having an ad-
vantagre,w.',hich by h.e definitionis one of the distillcuish-
inr fer.tures of a, franchi seIPor the ar.s rsason~a rigft or
privileoe 'Tiven by the constitution.,cannot be a franchise.
Vhether the privileg-e of voting in the United Staies,(in
view,- of the provision in the United States Constitution,
guarenteeing to te people of e: c!i stee a republican for
of governiment)will be di scussed herepfter ,under the head of
political franchises.
Of course !ranchises must in this country be granted
by special s[atute or b, so.i-e statut or process,if blr the
latter.the riTh, to becone a corioration -ay be . con-rion
right;but the riqht to enjoy the franchises is only acquird
il the man-i-er prescribed i prseori--e i by the le
gislature~subjert to the condlitions express or implied,
wvhich the a7 imiposes.The priniary differences between the
statutory or conLon rightand a franlchise are-first in the
case of a co-mron or statutory right properthere is no dis-
crimination in its enjoyrientbet_..ieen persons of the same
classs s hile such a dlscrliiiiation is one of tho 'iscri.i-
nating features of a francli se. Secondly,the part, ies -.ho are
to receive lhe framchise -.re at-as ascerlained before it
is grantedq -,hile , s atu-,or or co,!mon rirfht -ay exist, even
though there is no one to clai-i and tate advantri-e of it.
rIII. Ar"iAl IS \ ( -h JLT,, RI ,T PT, , A Y A\'y B.T A P J'T-
(jJ-ij3; > f Y--- hR
i should be noted that a privilere vay be a co-rion
riocht in one country or state,..nd c franchise in anotheras
for instance the ri rrht of bankinggin e'ew Yorkuncder MaLe re-
straining act,passeO in 1804,tvhich provi(led tihat"no per-
son unauthorized by lpvJ.,ar becore a. melber of an associ-
ation ---------- or proprietor of any bank1 or fund for issu-
ing notesreceivinf deposits, ahinq discountsor transact-
in other usiness b 'Ihuing business. "it 7was held 'that this
cook auz.y the corTnon lavi right of ba, nkingain 1. made bakinp
possible only in the exercise of a franchise to be obtained
by legislative .rant.At the same time in iLgland,and i an,
of the American stctes~it vas n com-mon rit!ht,given by the
comm)on ]j or stcatuteto all who mivht see fit to enqa(fe
in the business.As has been seena statute a:. conferr a
co-on righ, o, a -r"i epeni on the scope of its
apptica,-ion,and its ascertained or its inde.iiLi~e benefic-
iari es.
IIT. tiA !O OAXT BE 'U_,Ei.1 LfIwtJ1 ( A iP 4-f1 i
Any posmer privilege or exemption can be given as p,
franchi seexcept those that fall unier t>~ i.inrf clr8ss
First ,those conferred by the federal or state constitutio s
or by statute or common law. 8econcIly,tboC prohibited by
the -Vederal or state constitutions.Thirdlv,those incidents
and powers os sovere(ifnty wihich are absolutely inalienalle.
f'he first class are not subjects of fraechise becai1,se they
already belon(,, to the citizen of common rir-ht.T' e other
classes are not because the poer to grant them does not it
in any branch or organ of governnent.
IT. }f, 'rPL GLASSIIPiO ATIO 7 OF T'?AfOfSl
As to the classification of franchisebuz fe' have at-
tempted it,and those u.,,ith reg-rd to special features only.
Rut it seeins that if the general nature and purpose of the
franchise ":.re taken as a basis of classification;thev may
be classified for convenience of me'orizincj and reference,
at least,as POLtTIOA~I . ,_FAO'iISJ'3S-those that jre fiven to
such bodies politic as citiesand incorporated villagesfor
the purpose of establishiag a 1imited local aovernmqent.
T ie oter lass "Ire may call POP2T ii k O ±. -ES. -such as
givento -,n oredinory business corporationand have to (o -Jijj
an or dina,rv tr,ns,cti on of businessand the pcoqufsi ution ' ,I i .d
man g7rneT, of prope h;,.
ihe IA;,e' class i-~ai~ 1)e sub divi(1ed ,vii h reference to
their o,, bstr c, or reIvive va, lue as-first,'r a1ehi ss inci -
dent Lo tbe trpnsr, ction of businiessSecond-fIrnchi ses vYarich
create propertyT Pifhts.
Ohapter II.
Propertyf Fra: c1it seg.
TTI * D ,JjI D i I L11I !- T D :C ATJ-1' O)F A PROP-, TV F l, ) ,.
Property franchises are thOse -Ihich give their po-
s3ssors certl-ain advantaues over their fellow.vs i Li tile use
of their ova propartyyor in the transac iom of busiT, ess;
or Kth rig ilh to ,ngafe in a business in vIfiich thej other-
,,,isb could not -as the rigiht to 2aimtain a ferT;T ,nd charge
tolls for the use of iG.8o0na of Uhe most couilion franchi s
of this class arelilnite4 liability ol contracta !ilited
riqIt to exercise he poe r of eqinentd q a inThe Ir ivi-
3jle of , corporati 9: to sue oml. be su'd in its corporate
ar t ie riht t o use a corpra.e s:;a,etc.
VII. AITUJEh OF PROP rR .IY / ,-IXJ 8IIS.
This cla, ss of proprtr franc.ises is usuall- con-
sidlered, by the courts as incorpora,1 heredit;.ents.Thei?
valu hebai ahe po t fr,privie:gj or adva a, ate -ey conaertr
in ait i on to hose 1--icls belonri to the individuals by coi-
mon right,in re[Tard ,o the o.,nership of property and bisi-
ness transactions c3eera!!, . onthe value of" !, frac.1i se
15 ' rela,i ve oia,.a t i --s d p en.-I on .. l vlue of the
proper-Ky to ;1.rhich it rela,tes.B t bhsr; ia, he insrt" 'nC.s
..r ere 1 f-,,'rAlc.nL se, is of value 9,asidO froT. aidi1depe cl.i_, of
other property.An exa ople of 'this kind ,.,Irould bo th-i ri fht
to maiLain a, ferr,wicl, ,ight bo of value io i e pOSesssDY
h oufTh no f'erry 7.TP a iain iel at the tiniN.
V III. "t-11 J8JL'LSUAL LIA 3 1 LI I i -:, I [ 1 ,q,- pR op ,, 7- r, Tr 7 -
S-IP /h:T TJS " <-TSS TRA.J SAC T I f.
BeafI"ore discussi g the e ffc, , of and -at te of t e
most promi1en1t franc]ises,it ,Iay be -ell o tur'n, our at; en-
-i on for?, n io nft to the co Tion and inevi tal.e I nci cents an
effec -s,o-f busijiess tr" scin- &Id in thie firs t place e
shou 1 oCiceat the 1 ifposas .-_n aver y one a pe rsoa al
lia bii t- f r I-its oi.Tj debts,and also for all tor-s coimmi ittecl
byf hi ,or , 3r done by his property, and lie is ,.1 so liable
for the cts of is ,,t- s on t o act within the scope of Ii s
appari: .uI,'.ority i a everr c a. se ,,here th liabi-,itr :.roulnd
at och o th.a princi pa! if ae a ere the one ,, i-ad.Thris
personal liabi Ii tj is s6e 7i, .1 " taht invariably attches to
property orLers, md to the partiefs to a business transc,-o
Bi io-n; Md .ideed it is nccossv .ry to prOtect, creiitors &nd
proniote -, ir dealinq betve.T .n1a aP,,:d i.And t 1s d ubt-
1"Iss because comnon- justice deman ! ,( it that The a: de-
clres~public policy s,,ctiuosqandj. ,very brancxie of our ju-
risprudence enforces it.
Againgone individual has no contro'l over or pox,-
er to la-vfully appropriate rIho prop3r7y of anotherno na-
ter ho.T necessary or advantag(eous it roay be Cio his business
interests.Such a pom.Ter hov ever does belong to -,hIe sovereigR
tv of the state,and rnay be exercised as einent rooai.
Indeed suc prirqary facts a s the le al !iabiltil here snen-
tioned,and the povver of e mileni;, r".m,,nare such co_ ion max-
in-s of la e thiat to entio_ thei seem a!-ost u rtecessaey.
But their conioc'ion j-ith the subject in hand i s so iriti-
nate tlat they caniot %..rith propri . ty be ' itdfn they
such fundi ental and undertyiliu c principalesq, ha c, they -)ust
ever be foremost in the inds of those .ihe -ould accurate-
Iv rIetect and defi---itely outline :,ii.e property francnises of
a busiaess corporation.
IX. -Lr[ GO)URIS }/-t C )i OfSS33ID I- 0 ) WI IA R01 iA;4UOL[.)iS j.
15.
These franichi~ses beilgj iost coln"oTaly ,iet vitb in
co rOhctio'n ,!ith tlia other irntaiibiehis ivisiblo bei iq calle
a cor-oorai,, o and .th courts beinrg confusod vi ,Ih one exis-
t(-,Jic,3 ,hich the natural se e s coul 11ot co mpr eh ad h eA n oi,
hlvo ppeared blanded -orot1er,2eoed to consider life too
short and tic too precious to loqicatl, discuss and df'-
Li tby defi. athe inost obscae of th e o i3 j.vi sibles ,;;ich
is the fran.chise.But theyf have neverthelass spelled out a
1o ieca soTutio:l for the iosc i ort,ant questions ;rhiich
arise Tith revi,rd to fraruchises th. Lugh iT fa, ct they I'ave
very often re, ched! teir con.clusions br sle !ie of, rea-
soni cf other than tha of considering -he purposes s,id the
facts of the franchise itselr,Yu the prachlicai result. has
made excusabl a the ill oi cal and or,9tI,-C alDpar "tay con-
flictii decisi us of the courts.
. I 0-. 8T0I.r TJ ITT tL.;I I[]TS OI!, A OORP ,)RkA oI r _ I.T'CTA... I I(
fi~b-LAKR _[4 L i0 13TU1 4 ,r S. i 'I SRY, hi >;u iif) Li 'kW hi TfiY.
het us consi(Ter t% ,o sit lP]a corporal , + " on c
ceivable,7Ljhich ,.,iou-l perhaps be a corporationa en. Od in
r-ercantiie business.,TlTia.t are the fraachises possessed by
sucil R, eorporation?'J3 rna.! Lirs; qertion tie limited liabil-
ity :riicl. is ,e ost conspCicous arid possibly .e chi ef
franchise possessed by such -! corporation.
.Te iind that, tho corporation is co nposed of a nurl-
bor of persons ;iic. have each contributed certF~ifri afaouit
of capi'althe su) of wlhich constitutes the ,rhole capital
on xvhic_4 the business or the corm biuation is to be carried
oln.These iembers to all appearatices do business cs ot er
persollseacii -Gransaction beinrg brouglht about either by those
personally iiaterested~or their duli authorized agents.Yet
1, . find that if the assets of the cobination becoTne less
than its liabilities,t-e, cre~litors -,ust suffer as loss,the
difference 4 because tje state in the exercise of its s)ver-
eign po-,wer has e povered those persons so engagjed in. busi-
ness~to con-iracl.- debts that they noeed not pay if 61ie aMou-it
of capital per:i].nentiy required to be invested by thei
proves insufficient under their :1na)-.ent to aeet t'eir
liabilitlies and although the debts contracted wer. y tle
parties for -- heir own- nersonal dva!t.Ie,a.nd aIthouh the
inrividuol 1 eb er sof I-n1 corporation ad aPle ;3,ns fro
hich to .pDay their debts.This rflption frim liability
wvhich the sta ,e grants and the law enforces ,is a franchise
of the corporation,and illustrate well he principle in-
gre .iants .)f all franc-.ises w-hich is the advan-age given
to their possa;sors over those of the same statts ho
do not have th, -h. It is aw exe-aption rhat does not belong to
the citizen of common rifht, <his exe~iptio:aI uillht add, is
riot based on equitable principlesbut is ji.,stified byh a ,
sound practical political econoly for the pirpose of facil-
itating ].aIe Onterprises.
XI. RID RI PT 1 SiJkJ PiD A E SIJ V 1,T A OOAPOPATE TFAAE I S A
RAITO-I SE.
The right to sue and be sued in the name chosen by
te rlembers as Sh e name under .Tli2 ch th1ey ,TitI transact tle
business of the concern is iD this country a franchisebe-
cauee it is a principIle of procedure ever inforced that
suits must be brougiht b-: and against the litigants in their
own names,ancl as that is the node of bringing parties into
court.YLNd is "he only one that ,vou!h be ordiliarily- rec-
ognized;*,, hen the sate in a diff'erent case,pr scribes A rif
'erent rfay~tha t rant is a frauchise. T right to sue and
be sued in the corporate name in .giand,ca arly 1o, -
ever be terl.ed a franichise,because any concerni doing bus-
ness-as for example a partnershipor a joi.it stock assoc±-
ai;ion,-maV sue or be sued in the niarne thiefy have adopted
under .ihicli 1o ('o business. Tteref're tltis privi le[fr in
.ingland is 1, co_-i) on rirr.t and no-5 a franchise.
XII, '7._ [] RP-I ti T) Qf 5fI SE A CO,.'R.C)L OJ" Y-, BUASIh.SS BY
V0,IT 1, Fjrpo Di Ri'JOX5(RS _'C. , i S T-I ,A , rIC 1 .L
The right of a stockholder to vote and have a con-
troll in the business is either a ma',ter of contractor a
c0 l:m o1 ri Tht incide,nt to the 1te rest -v fed 'y the stock-
holder.It certainly can be obtained by other :seans Lhan leg
islative jrantso it is no- a franchise.
Xii . ,P FiVk' !J/_AJL SU'jQbSI 0DrT O- A1 COPPOPAL[ (3i IS .IYO A IRA.l-
Perpetual successionl,hich it is o often hinted
is a, francliserests solely on contract,and is the neces-
sary result of permitting one -imuber of ,- concer. b tr ans-
ferrin2 his irltarest to . .utsider,to constitute >e tra s
19
ferree in hi sstead a. meber. Perfact perpetual 3;cc,-sio n is
enjo r",:i by joint stoCk ssooia! ons,'v],ich are crea;ires of
contractu Idor authori y of the comlmon lawandl posss no
franchises. Tone of lhe le neus of' a franc;iso ,rS pres orlL
in the poL73r of perpetual succession. So to argue that it
is not c. fr'_niclii se seems unnec ,ss Cr .
IXT. rij .D". Tr I T( (Q. A CORPOI(OT.
T]ien to the conbinatio- under consi(r.ra, I.ionthere a.u
but t, ro fra.nchises rrPA~, oThne one cert'. in exemtions from
!iabilitythe other the ri rFJt to sue Oil be sueri in t-e
contr, aame.TP!i s 00:bnal on i s, call e, a cor-oraui on,
and a corpolation is diefined '-, ,. the (freatp, jurist,as being
an i nvisibIe.iLtaqibl nersne:i stinf-" only n the conter-
pIa"I;,in Of thk l th is refin-tionv.re ,pa invited to i-
a,, ine th.ae there exists somethinvT invisibleinaui, iblein-
ban0,Ciblate _ e eas odor!ess anr tbout f'eeli.-a.,, re,
.,is sonei.. ii. , C i s s blin, s . to 0 !E,; s deaf as
a Cog horn a, s d ub as F va uu -1is c pFbl e of contract-
ing an( doin- all Ninds of business.T-lut t'ii . al! Ics bus-
inCss capac tyits profits it can iot hold.VotTr I 6o not vi sh
to be undl'rstbod as ridiculinf th" ides of callifnC5 a cor-
porc,-, op an invisible person.Tha6 fictiortlih-e Ell other
le al fictions ias for a purposoamd that purpose va s to
produce brevity in. describing< ud. durlinr uvil u a peCul-
ar po ers nd liabilities of the person.s ,ho eij oy - the
corpor re franchi ses hi e th ey *,re ay ctili( t2-i hi -h e scope
to *hici the franchises &Dply.'Then the leagal fictioL was
carric - .qc ,er,and sought to be vnade ., te,- i; by ',hici' to 6,3
terni1be the status of the corporation under the fourteenth
FJ',.nenCIenat to the constitutionetc. in that capacityt ,as
beymond the scope of its usefulness.
A corporati on axi~sts in realiti as vel -.,s in the
conterplaiio of la'.,a".nd t;hre is ,o reason y its actual
exist 0.ca should not be defined.7W,.ye have examined the fran-
c ises of e, comon business corporaiaionsd sside from its
fra chisos -e find it is ilpiy - , combination of inrivid-
uals doinr-r business.''Phen <. ,-at is s corponation?It is a cor-
bination o' individuals for a cer L',in pur-pose;to aii i-i the
acc opli i. u le of thich tbe. t.re V'iven1 b the s-ate Certaifi.
advaLitages called franchises.
21
Xi . m ijE IRI -LtL[] 4'() ELJ4R&)J. .-: I bT K .) vt. - I S A EM.RJGX fU-:l .')
0nle of t,,e peclr sovereifin powers WmicE sor@ cor-
porations a,,re perhitted to exercisegis the powoer Of emi-
nent domain.TbAs power is to a limitad extent,deleg-ated by
the sta,,e, to corporations en(a,!ed in a business of ,such a
public nature tha; th, exercise of this powjer .:roul: be
justified on the theory ol' the reatest c ood to the, (Treatesi
number.And this power in the hands of a corporation is of
course - franchise.
XVI . P".1iPYI (): I GP '~~I( \~ j;t S,,,
All prop ert is oidinaril1 suhj oct to taxation br
the st ate, and an im-aunity fro- taxation of certain prop rt.u
by the state it seems must ba I- franchise.In the, cese of
iMlorgfan v Louisiana,it was hold that eerption from taxa-
tion was not such 2 franchise Cs could be mortuae,qad an d
soldand in the same ce-se it was strongly intimate; that il;
muni-ty fron taxation. was not a franchise at sl l.Bu b elI of
the elements -frnc..... se :ero present,anol there is good
authority in declari , it to be suc h ic! seems to bthe
natural and logical conclusion.
2
x-- I . , R I C + L T T N0 1 1 T, , A-m / _ _. ! £ L : , a . . , F',i ! , o L f - T
I S k -F .- .
I, -as been held in ny casesq uill iv is no long-
er. cuestionedt.t1,t the rifht t,. 2intai, a hj(Vn.JPT or pub-
lie thiorouqh rare of a.,ny ,i and charre tolls for t be use
of it,can only be ad P-I a .rant fro t-,le sa te,rnd sucb
Tr 0t,1 is r franchise be reas , - fo+ th s-- aiA ng
and T-eenin., controlI of the thorourbf!}fres in that tiiP,.r i s
!)-,cause of the quasi-public n.ture of the business, anie . -hle
advant ::e to be u led by th e public in ;aviI1qy the regu-
lation of tolls controlled ':y the sovereicn o17 er rather
than avnut it so.lely in the bands of those enaed in
the minta i aPca of the ro J.
1~i . RI0-W tJ4 bT PS RrLPr J ' i4jn
(Jorporati one ore usualy a!lo-.ecI to holrI _an!d to
teenort _ full njomen of uheir other
franchises.But it is a fui'liiental principal tha,, nothin'f
buu natural persons in esse can hold and dispose of real
estale of co-m. on ricrlit;and os a, corDort, ion is consirered
an artificial person,it cannot ,,:itout autb]:ority fro. the
stateeither express or implied,1old lan.This porer is
usu,!lF expressly (fivei_ s-d whether expressedly or impli-
edly is a, franchise.'_j-e right to interfere fi-i4 . the tile
of the corporation is hovzever solely .,.ith the stateanld as
in the case of an aliencamot be attackec collateral.ly.
X-1IX. T-; Ri(LT T( RU"T A PUBLIC _P,,Y j S A FPAf(Ii S3
It seems to be well settled at common lat, that the
rigi~t to establisJ4 and keep a public ferry cannot be exer-
cised w',ith out a grant from the sovereign pover.And the
statutes of many if not a1! the states have declared ',.hot
the co ion laI ,,as,a.nd provided means by :1ich the rir ht
may be had.The same reasons wihich justify the government
for contro ling thoroughfares 9enerally,-nanmely,the pub-
li nature of the busiaess-apply to ferrys.The question
whether or not the sovereign power may grant rights to ferry
bet-,weei ci sahe points,to different partiesis a much moot
ed one.But it seemsifrom the weiffht of authori U, that -th ev
-- ay if the first grant was not by its terms an exclusive
r i t-.
T7C. P]TTYK' P}.1GS ARE IRAi'.T(D I S,,.
Patent riqhtsri,,I.I are gral .ted to invetorscofisist in
moLopolYnhich the letters-patent allow, the in.venLor io en-
joyf'or a limited tij e,as a recompense for his invention.
These monopolies have alwa been obtp-inable only froi telC
sovereiqn pocier;(the Inited States Govern ent qrantilof
them in this country)and as free competition in businesc; is
an elementary rifrbt of every citizen,it is plaiL thbat to
create a monopoly that Wll be recognized and protecterd by
the courts; sovereign poier must be employead.And this grant
is a very typical exaimple of franchise.A ±T=X X The rFrai
iag of these monopolies for a lii ted period are justified
by the advantag qe to be obtain, ,d b-, tie Country in general,
frori the encouragement thus held out to inventors to im-
prove useful machines :,nd articles of cotnmierce.
XJ JTAPgJIDOrS O .P i'P I'SS.
Copy rights-A copir right is an exclusive right given
to an aul;Ior to publish ans sell his ow-L± uwork for his o zn
benefit during Ca. certain liti time.It is , monopoly
and whil- the common Iar recognises the ri(Thit of the authov
to first publish his rorkit gives no such protection as
is cquIre(. ul.er ti 0 copy ri0-hi T, rs.In the [United Sta tes,
copy rignhts are granted by the !general niovernlrianlu.1ld are
franchi ses of the same nature as patent ri ghts.TheC reason f
for grantin !! patent rights,,pply .vith equal force to copy-
ri ghts.
Trade Zi,,Iarks-These are also franchises.Tlhei are mo-
nopolies of a certain mark or name user in business.5' the
M.onlopoly of their use.their owners 9,r enabled to protect
themselves from the public agairAt counterfeits,anJ aainst
fraudulent practiecs by competing dealers. The value of
trade marks depends on the reputetion of the party using
t1hem,or the popularity of the article .Tith whichl they , ,,re
used.They mc;,in some cases~ba practically acquired by
prescription,or longT usa.ge,bu.t under the la ws of th-e United
Statesthey are clearly francliises.
The right to be a, corporation is said in some of the
cases to be a froanchisebut a thoughtful study of the facts
would tend to persuade one to think this viewv of the case t
to be erroneous.Because a corporation is simply an associ-
ato l of iiiJivi dUa1s posS ssed s ith fra'chi s; SSO to s'y thI
tiiaG tie riTht to , , - corpora, i!a is a .[rac'chrrosS!qTOu1 Oe
iil e fect "ayi.-Ig tYi ai; Ki e re ,.ppor ti', ity to be mndo,.Toc
-itha P, rra achiso is , francfis, J' ici surely canaot be iog-
The right of bankl Jag i s a fr aicU soaAt c"o "o'1 av
te riTht of barlkinT 1)eI oa- g s U') ev ry citizen at com flon
ri!Tht~a id .so Uiht be 3 ercisea bj hii at pie'sure.lut in
Pany of ta s 1tat13 0 Snera ta, tuttas restral i ;IT th e righit
oLP bankianj~hav2 beck! passed.kL A._1 5 e thiose rastrabiinl acts
io fW bfect, ta 1 s a'y bcia cos son la rirrt,a~i rsra bi qikiaj
g g! possible in the exercis T' r frr)7t fro L the state,
.e p i e .v I I a a fr...ciS Tbe ri Tht to i nsure
st-nds on auch the sa 0 foot'nj as MI? r8rigat of bankini.
-"L (in. nest localities also a fra,chise
To enu0ra' 1 JI the franchises that ha-l bean or
May be ni vqvlrou! b i ipossib!,3 as Tia be rea 1!: seen
froa-! thtia very nat~ure of the caso,but mnoulolh bave be, ien-
tio-leri to ri ve a rncat i le. of their nature.
77iI, i 8,kAY£.il i-S / R 3-RIT 'I) Wt-VC PROP T? _'Y .iP-A 1,Ii
(ertaia classes of franc_;iises -r3 unifora, ly .ld
(>) b prip, rty,rI a such iirblo y-,:ca{i f!. il o os -:e
carl i mposeD t,ax 3 on. p-rsoras or propCrr .r ic4 ar, lot vi --
in its JuI s iwi,,vsrv orie 4'thi - The stage 0153 al a,!-
ID~ianee to 1tflTad every fraichis or privi 1 ige by the'il,
is subj ec t to be -axd by _ie state in ratur!_ for tlia bene-
fit and prot tiot -.... r c aI vd fro the ,nta_ covr 6e it
P" 1s-i s of ascerjal 111(1 value of the fralch a or the
-ode of taxasionvarias frrmtly i, different statssbut tnc
rightS to tax is unifor1iy lield,subjact /o1T-vart. Me 335
in- !jqitato,*u Thils iiitatio n a."7 b suTDaiza : about
hhus: ;ro porer but the s ver i-ty I ratSimi z rt fraceisa,
or an absoluta! y deparl.t 2 3ov, i- ty ca tax Q-. fren-
ciiss.' 1 erefwa a statse of ti a United States das o a v
t- tax a franchise gra,,a by tia UJ-ited Sbatas. Tsithir
1as , cit yr o jtler iullicipal fover ii 8-t porxar to tax a
fraacj'_isa trsart by the s-ate ii avhic i I is situated.
['his imitation is based on reason,because if the sub. rdi-
nSa po~vr~ T5as pl~traei tD tax; the por.Tr t. tl.x b' i-!, the
28
p.o r ,o destroy; such a- axerel s, 3y the ubordfnat3 ov-
or"1 iO:Lt," oul( prev{±!t the sovertiji po1r fro I prot .cti 1j
i ts aa I s vrat :3 r i iq ntTcr,. ric ieJs o1 f courss c ontar y
,\7i .11 -!* fIQk2 : J Z: ; I r{ I P/k?.i' O-_' I' .:[ SftiT KfT-V i,-><T'Y ( I I 'K'] i2
.V !I, L .,is F / _ ' ,O i I I -1 'P ' y T : ' A i ! i C , i- I'll
then it is att i p I to userp Ln3 5ovirei ao S.1r-
or br iihe i xrcise of a frTioiis, not gra-at 3d,a quo -Tarrant
,vii]. lie aaiist tb3 offeadi party.anyd that party cannot
cl i- any advantage under th franc.:. se he Dr sua to ex-
orcise.FI'here secis to be an appar :>t exc~pbion to tlihis ru1c
i-i the case of a de facto corporatio1.I3uat ii thas3 cases,
as all parl ies ,oJiestly believe Lhat a cor-oratio, existed,
te equi table re1if is to mrsu-cefor tLihe prose as inl
3andi th-1 it ijo 1xist.But i 1 th cas-3 -f a i er userDat ion
of corporpte po'rars,'o equities il be allo5ed the pretend
inr partieCs as"he wi-o CO~nes ito equit71 vas2 co*e ..it~
cte3, i hands."'_Co p-23asu e that thir)T shoulid , entiti3d to,
t l a L vanP-g es :0 b3 _eriv3_ fro 'icorporati lion accout
of innoce1t par ies,su1pposi-T tgera to be such,and contrac-
29
iT1T fith the - as suc C 1., 6 s co tr "ary -O erery :C1undi ''e'ta
priT) e1 p! of la and of reiasri .T ake f a TII.. f Ti I.
0 li i- (I liability for dbt.r T t fra! c. S!iS.'-, is a !e (fal
d fens just as i1- ic ,o tIe statutP of i it i. o-,s ar3
d Pal Tfeaces and like? al! !eal efanCes,are I TI0o sCnse
matters of c-)tract.Let us take an exaip1e. Sup os - A.. ,ho
is 22 yOars (-) ,coe s to B. ,and repra:,ats hif esel as 20
years o1d. B. ,bs~v y_ (T 1i- i to be 20 years old,enters into
, cotra, t rit hi._B. attepts to enforce hi ri[.ht fro
,- e o, tract. an A., plIad In_' Icy as a deence?Of course
iiot!fo more ca i an associatioa of individuals,i!o iiave
pretendae to act as a corporation,but U. ithout authority,
plead tJe corporate franacis of exac iptioa fr 'I perso'rial
!iabilitF in an action for a debt.The case ofqidechanics
T[atio a! Bar!I- v Pendleto n 55 Hun ,579 i s easiiu i stinlTui sh-
edor in f-cU oes not ilitade alainst this Joctriebe-
cause in that caseathe parties could] not be he, l as part-
nt ras there P7as not enoufgh allvred to con.ect the '1 ,i ith
any busi-iss tran saction of the asociatio,.O£ courset e
use of so ,e framchi se vri tout -,n autihori ti can ofll: be
so
r e li s'va ( aq Pils S~ * by- 1 a T 0rardi iiT eaa -,I fb1 i' P stra crb-ri fig par-
tieS fro:-4 fart'. er usurpftion.But it is cCrt,..1l7 s ,
fro>- t(1, a uthor i -f to say t-ha, t the cour ts I11! Jever awa, rd
fl'vanqarTe to ,U pary Y:D acFou9 .t -f a, ,ron11fTI usurpatYi of
fr ri - e ss.
3K.X. 0L -'f~ ; IfA3 ' i -r)j - +'v p ..n %I l i" i -I./ _.:_'.,'I Li,
.... V "ROU BI ill
F1 r1i-_t I r' -* TiP.I '.!.O Y, 01 A } r "I .+ 1 ,... -, . ) RY AI\ , ) H S, T ',4 ,
As fralcVlises are < sby the sovereigi1 purer
Of-0he state to i.dividu,. and as the g_ jaj)tirj of bxem is
enlire1j di scretionary ,.ri th the state,it fotlovs t.111at :o
potrr c,.0a c ,pell tahe raTn I4T of a franc0i se, eit'er can.
One e ir thbout author t',act for a-jnuYr i. .. r ant-
-inj b'e'. -Zence i- is -ha- , sta-c , ar cr rc a _,ore .r cor
pora ti - ro eXJ" .rc < S ri f T 0 ,c1,i '. ih i its territ ry.
I f it <T aer 1 iot SO nO stat could be SOVer 5111_ i a".y pjow-
6r t]h.at could ]b 31'+3 ? by -1t -t .
its poli tical nianag .- i And 2,S ay ri it p prigvi Ita or in-
+lnu&]i ty, 'ii c_ absoiutely belongs -O the 70V5 r Ient of +e
stats,,ay be grant> as a ,.anc.i e if the eta- could t
ders, ts sover aiq--t7 iould b 3 (I no-inal,nd 1a3!i r i r .e d.
TaxiJl corpora-i.o1,, ,roe iTt3rD ---,rc
.... ..u..a o- i f c.oq er c beca1s t ih-. _::arcisa 4c' ,, frano.i8pe
is no; 'l3c3sS.r' r ;z I nter -Stab - co2 .1,3ro,3.IA1d t ,3 'r, "C'i 3PS' a e s a...
. . ........1 7- fi, ij 15 aTr jV--r, 'IiC iAs , P to 811
d 0 IT -- ,- P - y0- ~ l .. S t.. .
joy ali ty 0 o , f r et s do :oy.A fra ehis. cc
i ja- a (ei a8 a, ad scvPreT i -,r if ny y de v _, c " tJ- gr. - co u,
be extra- w3Trit ri ,;!,the result oul be tit - v ffoVe r -
~ort~ Dal eexeroi ni. its s- veT. jity )v8 tir :1Jrly
.over,-_.e i,- an: tat ajainst the la .; rs po, raer
to verta ql c-.rio ar u co l c ii, h
-n3 D1 [ ~t 1 i &'1- v 3'~ -r,~ Y. :
f r af 1 f c s.s .. . d i Cl d into -;o cl r; s .
=_,rs:,' fr ,-Ichll jS3 0il 3:lt .. o tiA transactio , of usi r;-,.... , r"r t] 0_ c o , m e
sucht as lie ritht t' sue ..... be ui a the coporate mamq.
privierT of § ailt, i f._ a. farm[. T-:, ayi a 1-,:o opo y re
eRKtp].eTh e dis tinctionl betren ao these ttvo classes seems to
be tha the for rner is un. i aciden; of a certain btsiaiess or
trad , a uere immi auity Jr privilege ,Jhioi may be -takenl ad-
vftfltPfie of,0hile, the latt- r is a special rightthioL , en
exercised i inci"ent, to the enjo ,,ent )f propevt7,or rath-
er creates in its possessora peculiar property righit.Thiat
isonl is an advantage in the omriership Dr ase of property,
ii1ie the other relates sblIy to the transaction of busi-
XIT~Ii. Y-.%.{ O.BJ JO'i' Oi,' 011I S 'I C.ATI O4.
The i oportlane of thi s classi fication zillbeco o-s
apparent,anfl the necessity of keeping it in oind nore ully
realized ,,h deter. ,ing ,,hat fraicluise may be mnor-Ugaffed
aid soldand 71rIat franchise cease to exist o.ihen the busines
of the party jfho possesses th-v is vound ip.
TIIt. 0-\ IO {IS" ,S I o 1) iT? 0", T, TRAPTS!AO'TP 0) 1 P±' BFJSI .IFJSS.
it is eviden, that the privileges or ii',mnities
,Thich ve tear_ frtnohisesincidsnt t the iransaction tf
business,carnot be proper- cyoand as they are not property,
they- cannot be sold or mortqTvedbut beia[q i l'ci. "ntI s L'..ic
33
adhTere to a certain. busine-<osthey majT change hands by new
pa rties sc, to te buiess t e ' rbors 01' a coro-
rai Ao1 >in,yV nantir ly changeb, nae ,, e,nbe rs ti k1i:ia the ol] one
placesgand fhe franlc ises ..:,hijl Coal'inLle to att;C 1 to t ,,
business.
It vwoulJ se , that .tis class Oif fralcrIhAss be-
inag based v-hlolly on -,:Le policy of the Tover' n nentamid being
of such a, , nature that property rights ii then cannot be ac-
quiredthe state -iay vithdra, tile at pleasure ,iithout hav-
ing reserved -t]i.at rig'ht.W!hile a different doctrine rill ap-
ply to the other class of property franchi ses.
X V-'SI! I rRA_{:TO :T ,,.o I(C, A _u P 7OP 2.. B.RI7 .-. y
Franchises mvvtic]. conStitute property rigfhtsas has
been saidare those ,hich are inciden-t, to -the ovnership of
pro-nr ty.Theiy create i"i their possessors special property
ri,T]1ts. Ther are spolcen of in the books as incorporeal
her:iditimesats, :nd are al'zays consiired as propertY in tie
hands of their posessors.
XsI ,'1 . 'N IL- , LMLJtJ '-. .' ' -"i cI, )j ," 14 R Ti N M " T .... Y... .. Y Azv! J.. , 7 [r ... t ll,-L ';
34.
1t is-.ll settled that this class of property franchi seS
are subject to the exercisO of' eminent (tofla. the sa'.1o as
a±'y other private property.Public policyor public ndt to
justi fy the actt anid proper compesation to reimburse Ior
the loss,vill alzays per il t the state to recall a franchise
*,T.ether they cari be sold or iortqajed depiods on the
permission griven by the sovereign po,,lcrror at ].east the
int: nt of that oover 1rilbh rej ard 'o tkheir exarcise.The
courts ff-'r the iost part holi that the franchi ses are per-
sonal trasts-confided by the state to the grauteeand that
the la-tar cannot nortjgage,lease,or transfer the- except
onpermission by the state.This iiermissiou,:ozever;-ay be
either express or imliod,ad ien it dIoes not conflict
'w-ith public policy,criay usually be implied from rather in-
direct authori ty.
XXI. Q I J SYAT 5,BY TA(1 T 'I S 'LASS () _HA.JGO-.I- S 8 hrPJY
rKJR P(OSS >SC1RS hf'ij0 IUS 0J~i~hir,:Vt ~ n~_ . _, ± ,, ., ,,., 0 8 ?A.1-'11 j-8 JS_[ :[ ,T --... . . .. :,i'lLL _ , I odiPAI .
1±;'1- {' Ilji ().BLiaAq I(Oj (), CI 0.Ell CO Ti'RAOT, 2LjJSS T-V 1 Roic. I S . _ 1J-n
Aside from the o; ercise of e'lnent do,ai.i,thjis
8.5
class of franchises cannot be takeni by tste5tac3 U1fliss
the riujht to recall them at aviy tine 1vas resorved to the
state when they -viere qranted~because the ifrantii f by the
state and accepting by the granteeforis a contract which
cannot be iinpaired by the passaj~e of any lavT..As such an act
would be in conflict w-jith the Jnited States 'osti tution,
restrairiic, the state from passi-g any law , i npairiag -iih
oblicratio of contract.But unlcss the grant expressly cre-
ates a ronopolya similar rjra,%t may be made to anot'h.er par-
ty -iihout coflicti.-aI with the constitutioi,thoug1 in ef-
fect t Le second gral.t T,]at r nder the first valueless.
Chapter IlI.
Political 2'ranchi ses.
XI , C <i . vvrJ-' IS S BY POLITIOCAL FRAT'{i 8J2.
Br poli tical fr.esee re to unl0erstral id os e
local no f e1s hich- have to d, ,-iith the govern-ient 0 tiLa
people.Tiey are del.Tat-ed soverei gftysfi the saxme as propBr-
ty franch1i s s, re 9but .iaviag no el e-Ints ' Ii0c 0 ou Ol con-
stitute property rigihtsfthey are ever subject to the -Jill 0
of tha state to racall.Any :overniental acti on by tlie state
that 1-.iay be delaated to local bodiesare proper subjects
of political franchises.It is alrays necessary that the fr
:itees of thes, franchises should bo bodies politicand that
their ,ioda of exerci sing 1h3 should b, iin aceord,of the
principles of a republican fora of joverra.ient.A co Ton il-
Usr1,,ion of this class of franchises is the liriltedi po-
lice po ir possessed by cities uatd incorporated villafres.
i . TJ4 ] RI }TIT OTI 7OT. IS JOT, iU I 'CUTi S OJ PULTTY, .A iRqALT-
a U S..
The right to vote. or the pr: vilIe(e of, exercisiyg
the elective frandhise,as it is colfMion1 y called.,i not in
87
any !e(al sense a franchise.The reasons are obvious. irIrst,
this belrt( a republican fore of jovr:' &o.t,TJi o h ieans
qfoverni isnt by represeilttives chlosen by thl people,and as
that can only be obtined by iecans of a popular voee,thi. -
Vote is not, ny per(issio)1l of te soverein,but is of itself
the -.iost sover-icTn act ]mao k n to our government. Sacondly,
thn P rec-ilatione reqardi LU votin{yjhici are basedL o-a public
policy,are general st ,utesgrmlatimn to the ihole people,
and tliough in effect they designate -i'j-o ar3 and :11he are not
qualified to exercise Lbis sovereign act,the fact tha; part
of a ,people are deemied incompetent.cdoes aot create in the
o- ,hers a franchi se any nore tian the lall which -.xxtx
prevents resident aliens fro ld7i real-estate creates
il the citizens a frPrnchise.I oropositioIi,:hich of course
no one vould contend for.
The elective frachise,populirly so-callad,1,as led
to much confusion of the conception of franchises,but
vie minq it from a leTal standpointtlere is no such thinq
as the elective franc;iise: that isgit is noz a fran;i se.
The stuatute3s re-ardliamr votingr beingr reyuP;tiois of th!
38
privil 3J3 to votaanrl not J7:ants of tiat privilOs'm.In fact,
oy a, anal-si s of te caseit ./iil scl- J , at no- 1t of the
o13 ..i5 co ion, to franchi ss r pr3s. tit in t.'e voti r
':R-;1 -o 0 B g -@ ,jj P!-Li -
XXXIIV. POtITICAL -. i, " 7 PQSLP) I - YA" ( -I
iD, ,-I _ ! ,s fT UGIAkL OoRPth pl.- i.8.
.. e sovereirTntir ) f -be sate Is a liiited sover ij i-
tUY.T-a hicyest sovereignty residi. iq _e peopl.Tie li-q-
itations in tha, sit,,-'.e sovereignfILty a tr3 se; iiin the stat
and federal consitutio_;s.As has bafr , aid, _ ao-
-r ...ant ri c, Cs .....se handi bt the
at-'_e oer, by '.osa alaTiants --,i thout ",flich
FjAte s v reim t CouI rOt -x..-st.Bet"I. On thoes3 lj,'mo i " lta-
'o, . .... l pa mr vy be A1eleriatped to an, local
bod- anr 3>r so a,.-t edositu -,s Y tat ,.ie Call Paro
litical ira-nchhise.The -)ost oon are -those del
1 -cal goverii-e-ntssuch - as iicipal copporati ons,and co-
si st - r) rivileges Df self Tov Ir1. i t> - I- ,sucI - as -,hn right to
lv to b-nfi.t I public, exercise
a y - ted e e i ' iaill, - I L l. -ooo en-,-t
0 l i-,e -a,, s e t do , a t -, -!,JI p i -, :i t - p)o lI I c e Do o ,e r .A i ! t h e
39.
Do,.,rors i-ienti one b i,, d irived b'- crra(r n directly Ifro 1 t1a
sto 0 a,ar.- proparly fra, c.)isas.
CX7,_KitT. '1.': SL A. i- 8 OWS C IAPly i ' 0)! i(R.I ,I) OV.i -,, A'TI) P 'Ji,'R .
.. ,:! \,- jL, POLI 'i (AL .'R,' F 0 i S_,S.
It is avid , I -1h IIa-., :n 'i) ] aI obtai t propar iT ri rftts
frou' a purely political franchise and therePfore th restric
tion oi tle state tMing prOpelty fr, ichisa 3S Oi ace ount of
incurring the obligatiums of contract,does not app1,w. isice
the state lay deprive a n.unicipai corpora.,;ion of its polit-
ical framchises at pleasure.
Kx X Ti. TV -.0 ?',(3 8:, ' :0ST P O'I OAL t t S.LS -d OI S -
0C .t.iI OJVRY ,.!Vii 'il. P0:,"T~ R P()SSISS ..81. VJG I ,I,, ..i'TD £f( LI IYBt I 'IT
I B .:TOEJRPZ<) 1Y O_?,FS,'_.i 0. I'.l .. p(iI f1 O, Di S A. Ti'I O
Aks ?, f-eneral propositiort.3te political franc'iises
of a municipal corporation are discretionary po' rs ii
thieir hands .Waka for ins .. ica the liimitart Police po.rer.The
po-er that_ is conferred by 0h stgte beini.-,he same ",s that
rhici. the state possesses, the rrantees 7iave, the s-ne dis-
cretion in its exrciso jacts has the stateand no ,ore !ih,-
bility attacii ; ill tVe one case t1ali ill the other for the
40
eIrcise of tie non-exercise of the power.it is also held
that ,.-here the municipality forbids certai:a acts unjder its
police IoIrer 2 md then ne(lects to enforce its ordiiatances,aa
cia arT 0o i 1 s results,tbe city or v211a,,- is not
1i able,arrd this see'-s to be in harmony ;iti the theory
of cDnsi erinrir tha Pct -.s under a fully r!. scretionary pow-
or.
7XXIJii . I.f OERTAI'- OA -S.8 IMP.;P,: iLivI TI SIJ> , DU:.i_'I.
_VR"- IrLPCOBL 07- ,T K PO S:-S0_RS OF POli'iI"JAL -P, l -i S- S.
fThoer e 1' certain ooiiticP,1 rpanoc ise; ,, iC impos,
on their possessors the duty of properiTy exercising them.
Such is the case ,;ith po.trer to construct and keep streets
in a safe co'ditio for trave !.A fai].ure on the part of the,
municipality to execute te require !ents vsould ake it !ia-
in damages to be recov-red by the injure1 part- ,,,rhoever
he ma-y be.
[J i ijy Ijy [ fjy_', AFjry rjjD . f> ;}_© _I~ O ' Ai PI:I hPI '_7i CR .,R.j r,
_C "GHit-L VOI D.
As a!l political frPrdchl ses are rant, s (I t, P Tn
Ili C, pality has 1io povu, r to ta-ko public 0i awi t!]Iout a
franchise conanerriw it,b,] ,rra.i.!s -rc in fac-t, U consti-
i,~~~~~~~~~~~, ct o onvi f e , o.,e r: i,:,, t , : ons (.'I ih te 9 er
cOnlstitution grants ite United States Oovern.menIt power,
An.d in the srle v,; , rb en. Mie r- u n-a. ,overn uent passes
an orliucJ tra- I ias no au;.orit y t to pass 4te ordi sauca
is wholly void.and can neiT, ier give pourers nor rights nor
in curr Ii abili ties. Such aOri iace stands oa nhe s5- s
foo ing as an uconstitutiona i lan,,boing void and of no
effeet,ab iumtio
XXKI X. (()TIiS h
A "or e minute i scussion of this c 1..... ss of franchi ss
mi ghit I pro 2i -able eut havi upg touch n (P the 11or e i'npor-
taut poit s, suffi ci en 1ly, s i think~ to idi cate tha, Ihe
term J0, ra.cIiSu m e a,., ver y (i iferen rights and poters
in dii e re nt-,n e aions and n gin , r,. to di fferenRt subj ect s
1 i ].L le,,e the su-j ect trustin t h t I have i ndicated
the constituent eles s;ets of the nost co: on franchises,
and by F, crude ctasci ficationsugestd som e a of the causes
for so 'rihi confasion9s is found in thba booksc con.ceriang
th r
~~Pja lib 1(
B , of' Auqu ' - -v ofJ~a~c :U ug~ s,, v *, a l e,t Psters,595i Opilioll or Tparifley,( ,J
T -ent,voi-i f ie..
0alif:o±riia v.PaciJ'ic Ly.Co.9127 U.S. 5140.
P,,pt v .T[,ica Insurance Co.;15 Johvn. 1SP 387,
Broo. - arnd L~edleC!-,To! °I.,4 8@
Bouvers institutesVoI.II 114.
Vood v. Larence C0o.,1 B1ack.G8 ,P 409.
0iFy ol ,ridgeport v.?T.Y., :. .P,. o. 3 Conn. ,25P 266
p_11e g e, I r1 .f es j n Oorporaions Sec. 3 ,
"-4" i1iaii v. S'arp927 '.Y, tll 't P ;19.
Pierce v.imnery,2 q .2 . ,484,P 507.
.cao Ral -ay C0.v.Peop1e,73 1I1s,9541,P 547.
Board o)1 Tra, - of C ica'jc0 v.Peopleggl i1ls.,809P 82.
II
-AttorIeY (enera, v.Utica Ins-Co. 4i Jobh.C h. 71,P 877
Art Ii iScc.18,KY.Cons'itutlon.
BlPck. , Vol.Ii 37.Oia, ses jdt, ionP 284.
III.
t 'i s t ~ d i i o ~ T . Y P ,, -1 0Pr l . 8, a 2 0 " Y J- l e P .0 , S e e 1
Peo,O V.TKtic e p i , . 1 J9q.B
Ourgis v.ILsr.vi-,t,15 'I.Y. ItP 170.
I V.
8t',%e v. City of Tope,,,30 lan. 653,P 657.
State of Ohio v. aty of Oincina%,i,20,Obio State,18.
Q,!ifdrnia State ;-lPa o ., v.Alta , Tel.(io 9. ai 98.
0'Donnell v.Baidey.24 L"Lliss. .880.
VT.
Dillon on Munlic pal OorporaTionsqSeo.C,,.
Hill v.9021rt4n,92) :ass.,344p 3:9.
SpmIldin. v. Andover,54 T.f, 38 9 P. 154.
VI.
See cases of Section I.
-VI I i.
]~-,dwl. , tc.v._arersto~i ;r ank,8C Pa,Stste,4_91.
Y¢a madv v. Eierhouse 18 ird.,270,
:Y. L fe I s.Oo v.0 oJo a8 ai}. ,300.
44
i,fass.Life Ins.Oo v.Esiieman,30 0, Btate,647.
'PaPMr v. Tenn., Tti onal IBank, 9 -. *Lsk. 9479.
Planters IIr s.v. Sorrelts,57 Ter:a. 935"?.
!lTob].e v.Ounning") 9 .74 1lls. :l.
P a v.].'- %,V,. R.Y. Co. 942 .11J s v ,654,
£ K.
,ic'. v.L.ousiana,93 f.S. 217 P 2 2P,
xi.
Coe v. .... Colum.bus P. a'nd ind, P..',.. 0o. 10 0. State,872,8 -
rli omas v. DD1'in, 22 'ifendal lsP 70.
At]insclOn v.P. 0. . .'.Oo. 4l f)5 St,
Bee -ia_ v. S.rat~oga and Scien", ecly PR.R.Oo. s Paige,z45.
_T-. Y. ;. [.R. C o. 9 v.Ki p 4e, i Y. 9 4 ,
Kraie v, CLoir el t d P. RP 0o. 5 ,0. ' te 146.
'4iss. ,?.... o, c. 3) cLon aId 12 jriesk 9 4.
State v.-iaine Oen rt 66 e. ,488,P. 112.
Si:,,e f "el Jersey C.11-r7 r a, i
Gordon A-ppead Tax-. 0ourt,,8 Ror S.
45
Je<P'.e, Srtm Branch IanIk v. SJke Ie y, 1 1] ac]. 9436.
Railropd Co. v.-a. 993 .. 3. ,:,9.
iirSt Divlsionl,S.P. ,, Py h.R.0o. v.Palcher,14 i'in. 22'!.
0onl,.iorgll v. .Lao 08 Otbo. g21 7 P 222 ,
XT I I.
Si',XOkfin U'al1Oy R,.R. Co...v. Liverr ore,47 Pa.,465.
]3acInail v. Sara-,oa, a, d ScS!elaectcdR P. . o. 9 3 PaiTe,45
,oI(f~nv. La. ,2 0%%o,2117o
XVI.,
Leaure v.i-{1!eis 9 7,Ser, and PSY.
Groundie v.,/ater Go.,7 Pa.,State,23-.
P.ny1 v.Lessee of Coster.14 Pet.122.,
1jansh.,; , v .i-c':nshar . 99, 2'- -;' .r'. Rep .(iIIs 11 :
Lla11,et v. Si 1ison,84 sf.Q.,37.1S } Am.Tep. 594•
iPussel v. aes -.IR. o.,8 Tex. 643.
4i-VuTh v.Cool Go 0 a icl Go. 9 7 IIls,2.
XIX.
id iIlton v.a.adden92 Ata. ,80, also 70 Av.Dec. -52
-pmoer V. jTqO1 ].vo Co.,18 ia. 8327 P 333.
Star]: v. c0o>rdn,! <'ott and y.(;tS.0, ) 87'7,also 9 Am Dec.712.
McRoberts v.,ashburie,10 >,inn ,D- .
Dandy v•Ohs~lmars,2, Ills. 9,212.
Benson v•qorrr&.n,et c .o f•Y. , 10 Barb. ,2 2 P 245.
Ake vestern RR. Oorporation,20 IT.Y. 8170#
Ii RPev.Stat.of' - . P - ,Sec.l-lO,
Robinsor on PvtentsVol.ISec.I.
aiter s v. vlan h ., ttan BE,-,.k,20 0. ,288
UTTica Ins.Co.,v. Scot 6.,19 John.,l.
I-e ss -v.Ter- z .4 ISerg. and R. 9 37- .
Up- i t y I iis .O0 o . Or -vm 9 4,Q, 3:T e" < 6
vr]be.ton v. Peters,8 Pet.,7i9l.
St ,we v.Tbornas 92 VTall. 507.
Ssr Jost (an-s Oo.v.Jzucr.:,57 Gal. 7614.
Spring Talley Go.v.Scbhottlee,2 Gal,71,
Lane Co. v.Oreqon,7 Wal.,71,
Portland Bank v.Apthpop,12 brass.,252.
Ooite v.0onn.Lubuei Life Ins.0o., 86 Qorm ,!i
Ottmya Class Co. ,v.iveCaler,81 illso .:5(
LLc(o!!ouqjj ii.; :d. 94 S1,eat.,316,
Osborne v. Bank of U. S. 99 T ji e at. 7,0
'XXI I I.
Pettis V.Atjin'sqC0 Ills.94,54.
Fuller v. oe. .57 !T.Y. ,2,n.
] .dUnour v.Layo4.9 0. state,
!4ational Bank v. Ldodon ,45 Y.y. I
Oha ffeev. LudeIinfr.7 3,a. gtnn.607.
Lanfer tr v.sVh eeler,11 Abb.'9_f., 0.-0.
ventz v.Love,8 .Atl.Rep. (PE,.,)878,
YXI T.
L]and. OTiar, P, R,. am_ 0'1.Oo. ,voToffeY,6 Ka11,9240,
People v.I'5ie .ol' Phila, , 9 2 JT.Y,tl.
\rt.LT. Tel o. v.Mazsr], 28 OState,5'91.
Paul v.Virgilnia,8 .,al-,lG
Ducat v.Ohicago,10 Vial.,410.
Fire Dept.v.,Toble,8 :.Dq83it,440.
Doyle, v.Oontinent 1 Life Ir s.Co.994 C.S., F5,
Maine v.G.T.,.V. Oo.142 U. S.,21i ,
xxXT2 I I.
Blck.,Boo: II,P 87.0ha-,'fees Ed.,P 284.,Sc 29.
:-Br (ivev Jriidg, CO.v.Dick,6 j io,.Q,07,at P 583.
a-rles .... . erridf e Go. v,,'arreBridre,l Pet. ,420.
iBotp t".ater Pr -r Co.v.B. . R.l.o. ,28 PiC_.,8 0.
Oantra] Brid,'re. _ o v. Lo:e, ll,-; 9 , a.Tr ,
,,I..,t.,P :,.Jer irnpike Co. .V.U.z.T.0o21I.,90.
'T.Yetc.,,..Oo.v.Bostol etc ,..Oo. , " Oou . 19c.
a.i-tteT of Yerr,42 Barb. 9 119.
Gue v.Tide etc Canal Co.,24 'T-ov..257,,
_~a~ ~,~~ ;p_ v. Lar, i 927 ,f. J. iq, $57.
Oorm~on;oa3 o_.tSi*,et, al .,tARlO Allen,448.B 445.
Co v.Oolunibus etc. 00.9,1Oo.,40 Ei 0io s-,ta,872,
OarTenter v.BIa ckhk ±i Ig u o., .5 T.Y.,4.5,P 50.
"ae f i.fild Toll ridg C o. --. J. TP . Co. 17 Oonn. ,40
(~e, Jor~ich fa,s lighlt Co.v. or Ci ity '-,s Co. 2,. Co-. ,19
GhineleclI-ouch e Lun:r an i-_oo Co. 1v.O-.0alth. ,!00 Pa. st,
488.
Dartmouth Col 1 v. Toor i-arC,4 Ve. t. ,518.
Oo.of Rirccl;ond v.00. of i, I'6uren 11 I!l:. q1.
P.oberts~ v.C ity of Rockford,21 Ii.,451.
Tbe peo-ple v.Porer,25 I]!s.,169.
City of St Louis,v.R.ussel,9 Mo. 507,
Patterson v. Society of i ianufacT 're. 9 .J.Lvr,8.
xx i.
Davis v.ivontgomery,51 A! .9129. 23 Amr.Rep.9545.
-_.eeteir v.Oineinat-ri. 119 O. Stateq19,,
Joliet v. Verley,85 IIIs. 558.
Bric]evr v .,v......svi11e,29 Ind. 187.
Fisher v.Bost, .,104 Mass. 987.
O-rant v. Hrie,69 Pa.State,420.
Conrad v.Trustees of Ithaca,16 :T.Y. 158.
0larich v.1 ,,ayor et c o, Xra shinton,! ;ieao,. 40.
~IM i 1.
.ve, V.City of RoIoDster,35 Barb. ,177.
0av anau gh v.Boston,189 id ass.,426.P 485.
,'7ak e fi Id V. Te6 _po~t,60 _,_ [ 4 F 8274,
0
Steele v.Beerio,91O At. ep. )4ie,)1:5.
.On v I t1o,1 1 ,4 ss.,47 6,P 479.
"1ov ,. of Idaio Sprinqs v.FilliaenlM Pac.Rep.(Oolo.)48.