Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Kaw Valley Drainage District

Citations

• 233 U.S. 75
• 34 S. Ct. 564
• 58 L. Ed. 857
• 1914 U.S. LEXIS 1272

Syllabus

<p>This court will read pleadings as alleging what they fairly would convey to an ordinarily intelligent lawyer by a fairly exact use of English speech. Swift & Co. v. United States, 196 ÍJ. S. 375.</p> <p>This court must take the j udgment under review as it stands and if it is absolute and not conditional it cannot be qualified by speculation as to what may in fact happen.</p> <p>An out and out order of a state court to remove a bridgé that is a necessary part of a line of interstate commerce is an interference with such commerce and with a matter that is under the exclusive control of Congress.</p> <p>Interstate commerce is not a matter that is left to the control of the States until further action by Congress; nqr is the freedom of that commerce from' interference by the States confined to laws only; it extends to interference by any ultimate organ.</p> <p>A direct interference by the State with interstate commerce cannot be justified by the police power; and so held that the destruction of a bridge across which an interstate railroad line necessarily passes cannot be justified by the fact that it helps the drainage of a district.</p> <p>Quaere, whether a consent by a Drainage District to the construction of a railroad bridge is not to be regarded as a i license rather than an abdication of the continuing powers of the District to require subsequent elevation of the bridge.</p>