constitutional and void, and no rights accrued thereunder to defendants, because not disclosed in the title of the act; and it was held further that the act of legislature creating the plaintiff company, under the title of "An act to incorporate the Crescent City Gas-Light Co.," was not unconstitutional nor repugnant to art. 114 of the Constitution of 1868, similar to the former article, because it was not disclosed in the title that the exclusive and sole right to make and vend gas in the city of New Orleans was conferred thereby.

Crescent City Gas-Light Co. v. New Orleans Gas-Light Co., 27 La. Ann. 138 (1875).

See EASEMENT, 1; MALICIOUS PROSECUTION; MUNICIPALITY, 15; NUISANCE, 16.

III.

FORFEITURE OF CHARTER.

13. Abuse of Privileges. - On a petition for the forfeiture of the defendants' charter, it was held by GARLAND J. that "an act of incorporation may be forfeited for a misuse or abuse of the powers intrusted to it. It is a tacit condition of a grant of incorporation that the grantees shall act up to the end or design for which they were incorporated. If they do not, the rights and privileges granted may be withdrawn. But this misuser or nonuser of its franchises must be first judicially ascertained. . . .

The existing law of the State forms as much a part of the contract in every act of incorporation, so far as it is applicable, as it does of a contract between individuals."

The abuse which was held to be sufficient cause of forfeiture in this case was the suspension by the defendants of specie payments for eighty days.

State v. New Orleans Gas-Light & Banking Co., 2 Rob. (La.) 529 (1842).

IV.

EXCLUSIVE RIGHT; MONOPOLY.

14. Interpretation of Charter. - Exclusive Right in a City. · The charter of a gas company provided that "said company

shall have power and full and exclusive authority to manufacture, make, and sell gas . . . for the purpose of lighting the city of Milwaukee. . . . Provided that no permanent injury shall be done to any street. . . agreeably to the terms and conditions of a contract now existing between the city of Milwaukee and" one Lockwood. By the terms of this contract the city granted said Lockwood the exclusive right to make all necessary excavations and to lay pipes for conducting gas through the streets for the term of fifteen years from the date of the contract, and it was held that the legislature had conferred upon the gas company the exclusive privilege to manufacture and sell gas in the city of Milwaukee without limitation of time, and that the reference to the contract with Lockwood did not restrict the privilege granted to the period of fifteen years.

State of Wisconsin v. The Milwaukee Gas-Light Co., 29 Wis. 454 (1872).

15. Monopoly held to be Constitutional. The legislature of Louisiana has the right under the Constitution to grant to a gas company the sole and exclusive right to manufacture and sell gas in the city of New Orleans for fifty years.

Crescent City Gas-Light Co. v. New Orleans Gas-Light Co., 27 La. Ann. 138 (1875).

Slander of Title.

Exclusive Franchise.

16. Injunction. In an action brought before April, 1875, by the plaintiffs, praying for an injunction and for damages from the defendants on the ground that the claim of the defendants to a pretended extension of their charter for twenty years from 1875 was a slander upon the title of the plaintiff company to the exclusive privilege to make and sell gas in New Orleans for fifty years from April 1, 1875, it was held that the action could be maintained, and the injunction was issued forbidding the defendants from setting up any claim under their pretended extension, or from in any manner impeding the plaintiffs in the full enjoyment of their franchise; and the court says, "The franchise of the plaintiff is property, and it has been injured in the enjoyment thereof by the claims and pretensions of defendant, founded on a statute alleged to be unconstitutional and void. The right to sell shares

of its capital stock, and the duty to erect works, buildings, machines, lay gas-pipes, and prepare everything necessary to begin the enterprise or business, vested the moment the corporation. began, and a void title set up to defeat plaintiffs' right to prepare for their business, invades their charter as effectually as if set up to obstruct the business after it had begun."

Crescent City Gas-Light Co. v. New Orleans Gas-Light Co., 27 La. Ann. 138 (1875).

Exclusive Franchise constitutional.

17. Monopoly. Quo Warranto. In an action in the nature of a quo warranto for the purpose of vacating the charter of a gas company, on the ground that they had exercised and usurped the exclusive franchise of manufacturing and furnishing gas for lighting the city of Milwaukee, and laying pipes therein, it appeared that the legislature had by special act conferred such exclusive right, and it was held that the legislature had the right to and had conferred upon the defendants the exclusive right to manufacture and sell gas, and to erect works and lay pipes therefor within the limits of the city of Milwaukee, and that such act was not unconstitutional as granting to them a monopoly, and that, whenever such a monopoly became oppressive, the legislature, under the constitution, could repeal the special privilege it had granted.

State of Wisconsin v. Milwaukee Gas-Light Co., 29 Wis. 454 (1872).

18. Monopoly. Exclusive Right to use Streets of a City. Quo Warranto. - The charter of a gas company conferred the power to manufacture and sell gas in a city, and to lay pipes in the streets, provided that the consent of the city council was obtained, and the city council, by contract, gave such consent and granted the exclusive privilege of using such streets for twenty-five years for such purpose; but on an information in the nature of a quo warranto to test the right of such company to the exclusive right to supply gas to the city, it was held that no such right was granted to them by their charter, and that the city council had no power to grant the exclusive right without

direct legislative authority so to do, and that they had no such authority.

State of Ohio v. Cincinnati Gas-Light & Coke Co., 18 Ohio St. 262 (1868).

19. Injunction. stitutional. The charter of the plaintiff company, granted by the legislature, provided that the plaintiff's right to lay down gaspipes in the streets of Norwich should be exclusive as against any and all other persons and corporations, except those who might hereafter be invested by the General Assembly with power to use said streets for the same purpose; and on a bill praying for an injunction against the defendants, it was held that this was a restriction upon the free manufacture and sale of gas, and was a monopoly, and therefore unconstitutional and void; and an injunction against the defendants, a corporation organized under a general law, and without a charter from the general assembly, forbidding them from laying gas-pipes in said streets, was refused.

- Grant of Exclusive Use of Streets uncon

Norwich Gas-Light Co. v. Norwich City Gas Co., 25 Conn. 19.

See MUNICIPALITY, 15; SUPPLY OF GAS, II.

Charter.

CHARTER-PARTY.

Coal.—“Quick Despatch."— The respondents chartered the libellant's vessel to bring a cargo of gas coal from Nova Scotia to Boston. The charter-party contained the following words: "Vessel to take her turn in loading, as customary, at Albion Coal Co., and quick despatch discharging." On a libel for demurrage it was held by LoWELL J. that an agreement for quick despatch supersedes any custom of discharging vessels by which they are to take their turn at the wharf, and that the charterer has the right to name any suitable and convenient wharf, if the name had not been inserted in the charter-party, and such wharf must be unincumbered, and that the "default" of charterer, which would save the respondents from liability for

demurrage, refers "only to causes beyond his control, acting directly to retard the discharging."

Thacher v. Boston Gas-Light Co., 2 Lowell, 361.

See DAMAGE, 5.

CIVIL WAR.

See STOCK OF GAS COMPANIES, 11.

COMPENSATION TO OWNER OF REAL ESTATE. See GAS-PIPES, 7, 8, 9; STATUTES, 8.

leans Gas-Light Company was incorporated in 1835 with the exclusive privilege of making and vending gas-lights in the city of New Orleans until April 1, 1875, and the Crescent City GasLight Company was incorporated in 1870, with a similar exclusive privilege, for fifty years after the date of the expiration of the charter of the New Orleans Gas-Light Company. In 1874 an act was passed by the legislature of Louisiana allowing any two manufacturing corporations, existing under general or special laws, to amalgamate and consolidate when their objects or business were in general of the same nature; and under this act the two gas companies consolidated upon March 29, 1875, and formed a new corporation under the name of the New Orleans