Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 5.djvu/677

DAKIN V. UNION PAO. ET. CO. 665 �senger tariffs on railroads, and require reasonable and just rates, and it is its duty to pass suoh laws, that it may pre- Bcribe such rates, either directly or through the intervention of a commission ; and that the question whether the rates pre- Bcribed by the legislature, either directly or indirectly, are just and reasonable, is a question which, under the constitu- tion, the legislature may determine for itself. �It results from these conclusions that the motion for in? junction pendente lite must be denied, and the restraining order heretofore allowed must be di&solyed; and it will be so ordered. ���Dakin and another, Adm'rs, etc., v. Union Pao. Et. Co. and others. �(Circuit Court, 8. D. NeiB York. Decemher 28, 1880.) �1. EquiTABUîi Relief— Damages. �Where the entire ground for equitable relief fails, a bill oanncit be retained in equity for the recovery of damages. �2. DHanjBKEE — Plba of C!o- Defendant �The demurrer of one defendant cannot be held to be overruled by the plea of a co-defendant.— [Ed. �In Equity, Demurrer. �B. L. Andrews and J. K. Porter^ for plaintiffs. �A. H. Holmes and J. F. Dillon, for defendants. �Blatchfobd, C. j. a general demurrer to the amended bill in this case is put in by the Union Pacific Eaiiway Com- pany, the Union Pacific Eailroad Company, and the Denver Pacific Eaiiway & Telegraph Company, for want of equity. A general demurrer to said bill is also put in by Jay Gould for want of equity. These demurrôrs must be allowed. It appears, by the face of the certificate on which the plaintiffs' claim is based, that the shares of stock named in it are sub- jeot to asseasment. It is not alleged that anything bas ever ����