Summary

Joseph McKenna New Mexico v. United States — Opinion of the Court

Examining the statute, we find that whatever is granted is exactly measured as a physical thing, not as an abstract right. It is to be 200 feet wide, and to be carefully broadened so as to include grounds for the superstructures indispensable to the railroad.
The phrase 'right of way,' besides, does not necessarily mean the right of passage merely. Obviously, it may mean one thing in a grant to a natural person for private purposes, and another thing in a grant to a railroad for public purposes, as different as the purposes and uses and necessities, respectively, are.
Source: Wikisource

Joseph McKenna New Mexico v. United States — Opinion of the Court

Justice Blatchford said: 'The track cannot be separated from the right of way, the right of way being the principal thing and the track merely an incident. A right of way is of no particular use to a railroad without a superstructure and rails; the track is a necessary incident to the enjoyment of the right of way.' See, also, Palmer v.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature