TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Cincinnati, Lebanon, & Springfield Turnpike Co. v. Neil

The Cincinnati, Lebanon, and Springfield Turnpike Co. v. William Neil and Others

Cincinnati, Lebanon v. Neil, 9 Ohio 11 (1839)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Ohio Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 15, 1839
Judges
Wood
Citations
9 Ohio 11
Headnotes
The Act incorporating the Cincinnati, Lebanon, and Springfield Turnpike Company authorizes the Company to collect tolls from mail and passenger four wheel stages, at the rate imposed on coaches. A clause imposing tolls upon “ coaches, chariots, and other four wheeled pleasure carriages,” includes stage coaches used for the conveyance of the mail, or of passengers.
Summary
Assumpsit for tolls accrued to the plaintiffs against the defendants for running divers coaches, chariots, and other four wheeled pleasure carriages, upon their turnpike road, through the gates, etc. Plea non-assumpsit. Reserved in Hamilton. It was conceded that the defendants, Neil, Moore & Co. run their daily lines of passenger and mail stages upon the turnpike of the plaintiffs, and were charged with the highest tolls assessed upon coaches, or four wheeled pleasure carriages, with four horses. The plaintiffs’ right to recover depends upon the construction of their charter. The Act of Incorporation fixes the rate of toll “ for every four wheeled carriage or wagon drawn by one horse or ox, at eighteen and three quarter cents; for every horse or ox in addition six and a quarter cents, etc., and for every coach, chariot, or other four wheeled pleasure carriage drawn by one horse, driver included, twenty five cents ; for every additional horse twelve and a half cents,” 26 L. O. L. 149. If the defendants’ stages are within the latter rate of toll, the plaintiffs have a right to recover.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Wood

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

By the Court, "Wood, Judge.

'It is conceded that the defendants’ stages, or stage coaches, daily pass over the plaintiffs’ road, carrying the mail or passengers, and the only question is whether they are subject to pay toll as coaches or pleasure carriages, as described in the act incorporating the plaintiffs? It seems to a majority of the Court, that a correct construction of the act, will bring the defendants’ stage coaches within its provisions. Coach is a generic term. It is a kind of carriage, and is distinguished from other vehicles chiefly, as being a covered box, hung on leathers, with four wheels,. 3 Enc. Amer. 271, *9 •tit, coach. A very large kind of coaches called omnibus, has lately come into use, which serve to carry passengers, newspapers, and furniture, ib. 272. Here an omnibus is called a coach, though not used for ¡pleasure, but for the common transportation of persons and baggage. Johnson defines a mail coach, a coach that carries the mail, and a stage coach, a coach that regularly carries passengers from town to town. Each is called a coach. It is ^contended that the word other, in the clause of the act describing these vehicles, refers to coach as well as chariot, and that the substantive chariot, used in the sentence adjectively, qualifies coach, and, carries with it the signification of pleasure coach. We do not so understand it. Coach forms a distinct member of the sentence; chariot then intervenes ; and this Johnson defines a half coach with four wheels, used for convenience and pleasure. Then follow the words other four wheeled pleasure carriage ; ■and chariot and carriage are coupled directly by the disjunctive or, intended to comprehend all pleasure carriages, other than chariots, but having no relation to coaches. We would not oppose the mere grammatical construction of a sentence, to the obvious meaning of the legislature ; but both concur here. A mail coach and a stage coach, are nevertheless coaches. A coach is the description in the act. The defendants’ coaches are run on the road with the mail and with passengers, and must pay the toll assessed upon coaches.

Dissent

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Lane, C. J.

dissented. The statute imposes a toll upon all four wheel carriages, but levies a higher toll upon “ coaches, chariots, and other pleasure carriages;” thus making a distinction between those devoted to industrial purposes, and those whose uses are more or less objects of luxury, and intending to favor the former, by laying a heavier burden upon the latter. A stage coach is a vehicle sui generis, but used for business, and in no sense a “pleasure carriage,” notwithstanding its ambitious name. I therefore think, that by the spirit and intention of the law, it should not be subjected to the higher rate of toll.

Cause remanded for inquiry of damages.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1909: 11939: 11940: 119092026peak 1909 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Cain v. Bowlby114 F.2d 519 (10th Cir. 1940)
  2. Bruce Transfer Co. v. Johnston287 N.W. 278 (Iowa 1939)
  3. Murray v. Lafollette21 Ohio C.C. Dec. 247 (Oh. Circ. Ct. 1909)

Most recent

  1. Cain v. Bowlby114 F.2d 519 (10th Cir. 1940)
  2. Bruce Transfer Co. v. Johnston287 N.W. 278 (Iowa 1939)
  3. Murray v. Lafollette21 Ohio C.C. Dec. 247 (Oh. Circ. Ct. 1909)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list