1. The obligation of railroads, under the land grant acts, to
transport property of the United States at less than commercial
rates is to
Page 279 U. S. 402
be fairly and sensibly read according to the words employed and,
not expanded or restricted by construction. P.
279 U. S.
404.
2. Authorized mounts furnished by army officers and transported
at the expense of the United States are not property of the United
States within the meaning of the land grant act. P.
279 U. S. 405.
66 Ct.Cls. 739 affirmed.
Certiorari 278 U.S. 593, to review a judgment of the Court of
Claims allowing a claim for railroad transportation.
MR. JUSTICE BUTLER delivered the opinion of the Court.
The Quartermaster Corps of the Army shipped on government bills
of lading over the lines of respondent and connecting carriers a
number of authorized private mounts of army officers ordered to
change stations. Respondent was the last carrier, and presented
bills based on tariff rates applicable for the transportation of
private property. The charges have been paid less $475.17, withheld
by the government on the ground that it is entitled to land grant
deductions. This writ brings up for review a judgment of the Court
of Claims for that amount.
The question for decision is whether the United States is
entitled to land grant rates for the transportation of such
mounts.
The United States concedes that it is liable for such
transportation, but it insists that applicable statutory provisions
and army regulations show that it has a property interest in the
horses and the right to require the officers to use them in
discharge of their duties, that they
Page 279 U. S. 403
are the property of the United States within the meaning of the
land grant acts, and that therefore it is entitled to the reduced
rates.
Respondent was not aided by government land grant. Some of the
carriers so aided are bound to transport "property or troops of the
United States" for less than commercial rates. [
Footnote 1] By what is known as the equalization
agreement, railroad carriers, including respondent and its
connections, severally agreed with the government to accept for
transportation, where the government is entitled to reduced rates
on lines so aided, the lowest rates available as derived through
deductions on account of land grants from the regular tariff rates.
[
Footnote 2]
The authorized number of mounts for which maintenance is allowed
to each officer is fixed by statute. [
Footnote 3] And that number is also authorized for the
purpose of transportation. It is assumed, as stated in the briefs
of the parties, that officers of and above the grade of major are
required to furnish their own mounts. The government will furnish
mounts and equipment for officers below that rank, but, if any such
officer provides mounts for himself, he is allowed additional pay.
[
Footnote 4] When the cost of
transportation exceeds the sum allowed in army regulations, the
Secretary of War may permit the purchase of such horses by the
quartermaster. [
Footnote 5] And
the Secretary may have the authorized mounts of an officer who dies
in service transported at government expense from his last duty
station to the home of his family; or such horses may be disposed
of as directed by representatives
Page 279 U. S. 404
of the deceased. [
Footnote
6] The army regulations state that authorized mounts shall be
transported at government expense "provided the horses are owned by
the officer, are intended to be used by him at his new station, and
are suitable mounts."
The right of the United States to have the concessions and
allowances in respect of transportation made by the carriers in
consideration of the aid given is a continuing one. It is of great
value to the government and, of course, correspondingly burdensome
to the carriers. The terms of the obligation are to be sensibly and
fairly read according to the words employed, and not expanded or
restricted by construction. When considering another question
arising under a like provision in a land grant Act, this Court
said:
"It might be very convenient for the government to have more
rights than it has stipulated for, but we are on a question of
construction, and. on this question, the
usus loquendi is
a far more valuable aid than the inquiry what might be
desirable."
Lake Superior & Mississippi R. Co. v. United
States, 93 U. S. 442,
93 U. S.
454.
In
Alabama Great Southern R. Co. v. United States, 49
Ct.Cls. 522, it was held that, when not actually in the service of
the United States, the men in the national guard of a state
transported upon proper government requisition for participation by
authority of the Secretary of War in the encampment, maneuvers, and
field instruction of a part of the regular army are not "troops of
the United States."
And see United States v. Union Pacific R.
Co., 249 U. S. 354. In
Oregon-Washington R. Co. & Nav. Co. v. United States,
58 Ct.Cls. 645, the court held that the effects, household goods,
etc., and authorized mounts of army officers on change of stations
are not government property within the purview of such Acts.
Page 279 U. S. 405
And in
Oregon Washington R. Co. v. United States,
255 U. S. 339,
255 U. S. 345,
this Court held that the personal baggage of an officer is not
property of the United States entitled to transportation at land
grant rates.
We are of opinion that the principle of these decisions is
controlling here. The United States demands service from its army
officers which requires the use of things furnished by them. But it
does not own, and, as between it and them, it does not claim to
own, hold, or have any property rights in the uniforms, manuals,
clothes, private mounts, or other things by them furnished and used
in the service. It would be unreasonable to hold valid the
government's claim of ownership asserted merely to secure land
grant rates for the transportation of such mounts. The construction
contended for is without support, and cannot be sustained.
Judgment affirmed.
[
Footnote 1]
Section 3, Act March 3, 1863, 12 Stat. 773; § 5, Act July 25,
1866, 14 Stat. 240.
And see § 11, Act July 27, 1866, 14
Stat. 297.
[
Footnote 2]
Appendix No. 9 to Manual for Quartermaster Corps, 1916, vol. II,
pp. 223, 228-230.
[
Footnote 3]
U.S.C. Tit. 10, § 801.
[
Footnote 4]
U.S.C. Tit. 10, §§ 802, 803.
[
Footnote 5]
U.S.C. Tit. 10, § 811.
[
Footnote 6]
U.S.C. Tit. 10, § 810.