Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Haber

Citations

• 169 U.S. 613
• 18 S. Ct. 488
• 42 L. Ed. 878
• 1898 U.S. LEXIS 1513

Syllabus

<p>The act of Kansas of 1891, c. 201, as amended and as it-appears in 2 Gen. Stats. Kansas, 1897, 761, c. 139, relating to bringing into the State cattle liable or capable of communicating Texas, splenic or Spanish fever to any domestic cattle of the State, and providing for the trial of civil actions brought to recover damages therefor, is not overridden by the act of Congress of March 29, 1884, 23 Stat. 81, c. 60, known as the Animal Industry Act, nor by the act of March 3, 1891, 26 Stat. 1044, 1049, c. 544, appropriating money to carry out the provisions of the above act, nor by section 5258 of the Revised Statutes, authorizing every railroad company in the United States, operated by steam, its successors and assigns, “ to carry upon and over its road, .boats, bridges and ferries all passengers, troops, Government supplies, mails, freight and property on their way from any State to another State, and to receive compensation therefor, and to connect with roads of other States so as to form continuous lines for the transportation of the same to the place of destination ”; as Congress has not assumed to give to any corporation, company or person the affirmative right to transport from one State to another State cattle that were liable to impart or capable of communicating contagious, infectious or communicable diseases.</p> <p>Whether a corporation transporting, or the person causing to be transported from one State to another, cattle of the class specified in the Kansas statute should be liable in a civil action for any damages sustained by the-owners of domestic cattle by reason of the introduction into their State of such diseased cattle, is a subject about which the act of March 29, 1884, c. 60, 23 Stat. 31, known as the Animal Industry Act, did not make any provision.</p> <p>The provision in the Kansas act imposing such civil liability is in aid of the objects which Congress had in view when it passed the Animal Industry Act, and it was passed in execution of a