PREFACE. All who give special attention to the subject of railroads in their relations to the public, are intently watching Illinois. This is alike true, whether railways are considered from a legal, an economic or a political point of view. The present constitution and recent railway legislation of the State, together with the decision of the Supreme Court based thereon, explain and abundantly justify this prominence. It is obvious that while, in its leading features, the common carrier law is substantially the same as administered in the different States, yet there are many points of diversity, as the result both of legislation and judicial decision. Those special features in this State are of such a nature as to make Illinois the pathfinder in the present effort to readjust the carrying trade of the country. This treatise is largely the result of investigations prosecuted with no thought of book-making. The writer has constant occasion, in the performance of his daily work, to state some phase of railway law, and has often found it necessary to consult many authorities in ascertaining positively the correct answer to what might seem to be a very simple question. Throughout these pages scrupulous care has been taken to avoid blending mere personal opinions with the authoritative utterances of the judiciary, and the exact limitations of the written law. Great caution has been observed to prevent errors. The author's object will have been attained and his labors abundantly rewarded if the result shall prove of service in lessening the work of determining with exactitude what is railway law in Illinois, and contribute in some degree to a better understanding and adjustment of the relations which the railroads of the country sustain in law, and should sustain in fact, to the people. F. G. CHICAGO, Oct. 15, 1873. American Merchants' Union Express Co. v. Schier. 174 Attorney General v. Birmingham and Derby Junc. R. R. Co. 256 Baker v. Michigan Southern and Northern Indiana R. R.Co. 175 Bartholomew v. St. Louis, Jacksonville and Chicago R.R.Co. 167 Bloodgood v. Mohawk and Hudson R. R. Co..... Boston and Lowell R. R. Co. v. Salem and Lowell R. R. Co. 255 .93, 301 Cathcart v. Fire Department of N. Y... Caterham Railway Co....... Central Military Tract R. R. Co. v. Rockafellow Central v. Collins... Champlin v. Morgan... Chase v. Sycamore and Courtland R. R. Co. 301 256 189 64, 65 65 44 Chicago and Alton R. R. Co. v. Randolph v. Roberts v. Scott v. Shannon v. Utley Chicago and Aurora R. R. Co. v. Thompson_ Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. R. Co. v. Dewey. 161, 168 158 176 158, 303 195 155, 164 190 Chicago, Danville and Vincennes R. R. Co. v. Smith 88, 258 172 125, 178, 198 177 Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific R. R. Co. v. Otto 163, 178 159 128 Chicago and Milwaukee R. R. Co. v. Bull 50 129 129 139 301 300 86 257, 307 263 246 65 74 |