« ZurückWeiter »
Dargan v. Mayor, etc., of Mobile..
Bailey et al. v. Mayor, etc., of New York.
Eastman v. Town of Meredith...
Mills et al. v. City of Brooklyn....
DEBTS, FUNDS AND TAXES.
Meriwether v. Garrett...
Darling et al. v. The Mayor and City Council of Baltimore 651
People ex rel. Insurance Company v. Williams..
Tracy v. Swartwout....
LEADING ILLUSTRATIVE CASES LAW OF PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANIES-ESPECIALLY
ESTABLISHMENT OF PUBLIC DUTY
Effect of Natural Monopoly.
21 Ore. 411, 28 Pac. 244. 1891. This is an action for a writ of mandamus to require the defendant to supply the plaintiff with water by tapping a certain water-main on Tillamook Street, and allowing him to connect a service-pipe therewith. LORD, J.
It must then be conceded that the defendant is engaged in a business of a public and not of a private nature, like that of ordinary corporations engaged in the manufacture of articles for sale, and that the right to dig up the streets, and place therein pipes or mains for the purpose of conducting water for the supply of the city and its inhabitants, according to the express purpose of its incorporation, and the business in which it is engaged, is a franchise, the exercise of which could only be granted by the State, or the municipality acting under legislative authority.
In such case,