(B.) STATUTES OF THE STATES AND TERRITORIES.

CASES ADJUDGED

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES,

AT

OCTOBER TERM, 1893.

ANGLE v. CHICAGO, ST. PAUL, MINNEAPOLIS AND OMAHA RAILWAY COMPANY.

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR

THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN.

No. 73. Argued November 8, 9, 1893. — Decided January 8, 1894.

The United States granted lands to the State of Wisconsin, to aid in the construction of railroads. The State granted a portion of these lands to a company, called in the opinion of the court The Omaha Company, for the purpose of constructing a defined railroad. It also granted another portion of them to another company, called in the opinion of the court the Portage Company, for the purpose of constructing another ⚫ and different, and to some extent competing railroad. The latter grant was conditioned upon the completion of the road by the grantee within a specified period. Work was begun upon the Portage road, but in 1873 the company became embarrassed, and then broke down. In 1878 the legislature of Wisconsin extended the time for the construction of the Portage Company's road three years. In 1881 a contract was made with A. for its completion, under which work was resumed with vigor and was diligently prosecuted, with every prospect that the road would be completed within the extended time. In 1882, before the expiration of that extension, the legislature of that State passed an act revoking the grant to the Portage Company, and bestowing it upon the Omaha Company. As a result of this the work which A. was diligently performing under contract was arrested; he was prevented through the direct and active efforts of the Omaha Company from completing his performance of it;

his

1

VOL. CLI-1

Syllabus.

the profits which he would have received from it were lost to him; and the land grant was wrested from the Portage Company. A. then commenced an action at law against the Portage Company, in which a judgment was recovered by his administratrix. Execution thereon being returned nulla bona, a bill in equity was filed in the Circuit Court of the United States by the administratrix against the Omaha Company, to reach the land grant in its hands. The bill charged that the Omaha Company had conspired with and bribed certain officials of the Portage Company, who, through circumstances named in the bill, had become sole stockholders in that company, to wrest the land grant from the Portage Company, and to prevent A. from completing his contract. It set forth sundry steps in the alleged conspiracy, and charged that the legislature of Wisconsin had been induced by the conspirators to pass the act forfeiting the land grant and bestowing it upon the Omaha Company. The defendant demurred and the demurrer was sustained by the Circuit Court.

Held:

(1) That the demurrer admitted that A. had suffered the wrongs complained of in consequence of the interference of the Omaha Company;

(2) That it must be assumed, as conceded by the demurrer, that the officials of the Portage Company had been bribed by the Omaha Company to betray their trust, and that the legislature had been induced by false allegations to revoke the grant to the Portage Company and to bestow it upon the Omaha Company;

(3) That as the breaking down of the Portage Company and the ruin of its contractor was the natural and direct result of all this, the contractor could resort to equity to enforce against the land grant in the hands of the Omaha Company the judgment which he had obtained at law against the Portage Company;

(4) That it must be presumed that the legislature, in transferring the grant to the Omaha Company, did not intend to affect thereby the rights of the Portage Company against the Omaha Company in the courts;

(5) That as there was nothing in the words of the grant to the Omaha Company which expressly tied up the granted land, it passed to that company subject to seizure and sale in satisfaction of any of its obligations;

(6) That the Omaha Company, by reason of its conduct in this matter, became, as to the creditors of the Portage Company, a trustee ex maleficio in respect of this property.

If one maliciously interferes in a contract between two parties, and induces one of them to break that contract to the injury of the other, the party injured can maintain an action against the wrongdoer.

When a man does an act which in law and fact is a wrongful act, and injury to another results from it as a natural and probable consequence, an action on the case will lie.

A sole stockholder in a corporation cannot secure the transfer to himself of