Summary

Portrait of Noah Haynes Swayne Noah Haynes Swayne Doggett v. Railroad Company — Opinion of the Court

The language of the act is too clear to admit of doubt. In a statute 'where the intent is plain, nothing is left to construction.' United States v. Fisher, 2 Cranch, 386.
There is no complaint that payment upon the bonds outstanding has not been regularly made.
We have no doubt as to the merits of the bill. We think the objection of misjoinder was also well taken. The case was purely ancillary in its character. The receiver represented the court which appointed him and the trustees of the internal improvement fund. Vose and Wagner claimed to own a part of the outstanding bonds.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature