[50]

[51]

decided in favor of the right of one Gill, an
applicant for a patent in a case of interference,
and adjudged that a patent should issue to his
assigns accordingly. An appeal was taken to
the Secretary of the Interior, who reversed the
decision of the Comissioner. The latter there-
upon, and for that reason, refused to issue a
patent. It was a question whether an appeal
lay to the Secretary of the Interior, and this
court held that it did not, and that he had no
jurisdiction in the matter. The court, there-
fore, held that the patent ought to be issued in
accordance with the decision of the Commis-
sioner, and that the mere issue of the patent
was a ministerial matter for which a manda-
mus would lie. This case, like that of United
States v. Schurz, is unlike the present. All
deliberation had ceased; the right of Gill, the
applicant, was adjudged; there was nothing to
be done but to deliver to the party the docu-
mentary evidence of his title. That was a
mere ministerial matter.

We think that the mandamus was properly
refused, and the judgment of the Supreme Court
of the District is affirmed.

[No. 992.]

This case is similar in all essential respects to the preceding, and the decision must be the

same.

Judgment affirmed.

[No. 993.]

This case differs materially from numbers 991 and 992. Charles R. Miller, the relator, having made an unsuccessful application to the Commissioner of Pensions for an increase of his pension, finally appealed to the Secretary of the Interior, and in his petition for mandamus says as follows, to wit:

"That the Secretary, upon a personal, careful inspection of the record and all the evidence filed therein in his case, and on due consideration thereof, made and rendered the following official decision:

'DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

'Washington, D. C., February 12, 1885. "The Commissioner of Pensions:

'Sir: Herewith are returned the papers in the pension claim, certificate No. 55356 of Charles R. Miller.

umn and destruction of some of the spinal
nerves," he is unable to bend his back.

'After a careful review of all the facts in
this case, the Department is constrained to
think that the pensioner comes under the mean-
ing of the laws granting pensions to those per-
sons who require aid and attendance. The de-
cision of the 6th instant, is therefore overruled.
"Very Respectfully,

'H. M. TELLER, Secretary.'

"And your orator avers that the said official decision of the Secretary of the Interior, so made as aforesaid, was a final adjudication of his claim in his favor, and conclusively establishes his right under the laws to be rerated at $25 per month from June 6, 1866; $31.25 per month from June 4, 1872; $50 per month from June 4, 1874; and $72 per month from June 17, 1878, and to be paid the difference monthly between these sums and what has been allowed him; and all that remained for the Commissioner of Pensions to do in the premises was the simple ministerial duty of accordingly carrying the said final official decision of the Secretary into execution."

The petition goes on to state that the former Commissioner of Pensions refused to carry out the Secretary's decision to its full extent, and that the present Commissioner, the respondent, still refuses. If, as the petition suggests, the Commissioner of Pensions refuses to carry out the decision of his superior officer, there would seem to be prima facie ground for at least calling upon him to show cause why a mandamus should not issue. This was all that the petitioner asked and this the court refused. As a general rule, when a superior tribunal has rendered a decision binding on an inferior, it becomes the ministerial duty of the latter to obey it and carry it out. So far as respects the matter decided, there is no discretion or exercise of judgment left. This is the constant course in courts of justice. The appellate court will not hesitate to issue a mandamus to compel obedience to its decisions.

The appellate tribunal in the present case is the Secretary of the Interior, who has no power to enforce his decisions by mandamus, or any process of like nature; and therefore a resort to a judicial tribunal would seem to be necessary, in order to afford a remedy to the party injured by the refusal of the Commissioner to carry out his decision. But it is suggested that removal of the contumacious subordinate from office, or a civil suit brought against him for damages, would be effectual remedies. We do not concur in this view. A

'It appears from the papers that Mr. Miller's
claim was before this Department on the 6th
instant, and it was held that the pensioner is
greatly disabled, and it is evident from the
papers in his case that he is utterly unable to
do any manual labor, and he is therefore en-suit for damages, if it could be maintained,
titled to $30 per month under the Act of
March 3, 1883, which has been allowed him
by your office.

would be an uncertain, tedious and ineffective
remedy, attended with many contingencies and
burdened with onerous expenses. Removal
Since the departmental decision above re- from office would be still more unsatisfactory.
ferred to, the papers in the claim have been care- It would depend on the arbitrary discretion of
fully reconsidered by the Department, and a the President, or other appoiuting power, and
personal examination of the pensioner made, is not such a remedy as a citizen of the United
and it satisfactorily appears that he is unable to States is entitled to demand. We think that
put on his shoe and stocking on the foot of his the case suggested by the petition is one in
injured leg, for the reason that the nearest which it would be proper for the court to in-
point that can be reached by hand from foot is terfere by mandamus. Whether it will turn
twenty-three inches, and for the further reason out to be such when all the circumstances are
that from "necrosis of the lower vertebræ of known, can be ascertained by a rule to show
spine, producing anchylosis of the spinal col-cause; and such a rule, we think, ought to

[52]

have been granted. The judgment of the court
below is, therefore, reversed and the cause re-
manded, with instructions to grant a rule to
show cause as applied for by the petitioner.

Judgments will be entered separately in the
several cases.

[102] THE COUNTY OF LIVINGSTON, IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI, Piff. in Err.,

[103]

the municipal Township of Chillicothe. In-
terest eight per cent per aunum, payable on
the first days of January and July. Fifteen
years. No. 18.

"Know all men by these presents, that the
County of Livingston, in the State of Missouri,
acknowledges itself indebted and firmly bound
to the St. Louis, Council Bluffs & Omaha Rail-
road Company in the sum of five hundred dol-
lars ($500), which sum the said County hereby
promises to pay to the said St. Louis, Council
Bluffs & Omaha Railroad Company, or bearer,
at the National Bank of Commerce, in the City
of New York, State of New York, on the first
day of July, 1885, together with interest there-
on from the first day of July, 1870, at the rate of
eight (8) per cent per annum, which interest
shall be payable semi-annually on the first days
of January and July, of each year, on the presen-

County bonds, validity of-consolidated com- tation or delivery at said bank of the coupons of
pany-order of court-estoppel.

1. Under the Missouri Act to authorize the con

solidation of railroad companies in that State with
companies owning connecting railroads in adjoin-
ing States, the consolidated company is entitled to
the same privileges under the laws of Missouri that
the Missouri corporation was entitled to under the
laws of that State at the time the consolidation
took place, including the privilege of a subscrip-
tion to stock.

interest hereto attached. This bond being is-
sued under and pursuant to an order of the Coun-
ty Court of Livingston County, authorized by a
two thirds vote of the people of Chillicothe
municipal township.

"In testimony whereof the said County of
Livingston has executed this bond by
the presiding justice of the county court
of said County, under an order of said

2. Where, when the consolidation took place,
there was a perfected power in a township to sub- [L. 8.] court, signing his name hereto, and by
scribe to the stock of the Missouri company, and
there was also an existing privilege to the com-
pany to receive the subscription, that privilege
passes by the consolidation to the consolidated
company; and the issuing of the bonds to the con-
solidated company was lawful.

3. The statute and the vote of the electors, taken together, authorize the subscription and the issue of the bonds; and no formal order by the county court to do those acts was necessary.

4. The fact of the issue of the bonds by the county court, under its seal, with the recitals contained in the bonds, and the other facts of this case, estop the county from urging, as against a bona fide holder of the bonds and coupons, the existence of any mere irregularity in the making of the subscription or the issuing of the bonds.

[No. 195.] Submitted Oct. 9, 1888.

Decided Oct. 29, 1888.

IN ERROR to the Ger

United States for the Western District of
Missouri, to review a judgment against the
County of Livingston, upon its bonds.
firmed.

the clerk of said court, under the order
thereof, attesting the same and affixing
thereto the seal of said court.
"This done at the City of Chillicothe, Coun-

ty of Livingston aforesaid, this 10th day of
April, A. D. 1871.
G. W. MCDOWELL,
"Presiding Justice of the County Court of
"Livingston County, State of Missouri.

"Attest:

for the interest, each, except as to for and
date when due, being in the following form:
Af-"CHILLICOTHE, LIVINGSTON COUNTY, Mo.,
January, 1, 1871.
"The County of Livingston acknowledges
to owe the sum of twenty dollars on the first
day of July, 1871, being interest on bond num-
ber one for five hundred dollars. This coupon
payable at the National Bank of Commerce in
the City of New York, State of New York.
"W. H. GAUNT,

The facts are stated in the opinion.
Messrs. Jas. L. Davis and Henry N. Ess,
for plaintiff in error.

Mr. G. S. Eldredge, for defendant in er

ror:

Mr. Justice Blatchford delivered the opinion of the court:

This is a suit commenced on the 4th of September, 1882, by the First National Bank of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, against the County of Livingston, in the State of Missouri, to recover the amount of 312 coupons, for $20 each, being thirteen coupons, due from July 1, 1876, to July 1, 1882, both inclusive, on each one of twenty-four bonds for $500 each, each of the bonds, except as to number, being in the following form:

"Fifteen-Year Bond.

"COUNTY OF LIVINGSTON, State of Missouri:
"Livingston County bond issued in behalf of

"Clerk of the County Court of
"Livingston County, State of Missouri."
Successive coupons for each instalment of
interest were attached to each bond.

The petition by which this suit was com-
menced alleged that the defendant made and
delivered the bonds in behalf of the municipal
Township of Chillicothe; that the bonds were
issued under and pursuant to an order of the
County Court of Livingston County, author-
ized by a two thirds vote of the people of that
township, as is recited in the bonds, and in aid
of the St. Louis, Council Bluffs & Omaha
Railroad, under authority of an Act of the
Legislature of the State of Missouri, entitled

[104]

[105]

"An Act to Facilitate the Construction of Rail- | subscription, according to its terms, or to the
roads in the State of Missouri," approved payments of interest and principal on the
March 23, 1868, and of the Constitution of the bonds, should any be issued in payment of
State of Missouri; that, as each coupon for the such subscription; he shall pay all interest on
semi-annual interest had, prior to July 1, 1876, such bonds out of any money in the treasury
matured, the same was paid by the officers of collected for this purpose, by the tax so levied,
the County, on behalf of said township, with as the same becomes due, and also the bonds
the proceeds of a tax levied and collected each as they mature, which shall be canceled by the
year by the County, from the taxpayers of the county court; and this service shall be consid-
township, for that purpose; that, before the ered a part of his duty as county treasurer."
coupons sued on became due and payable, the The answer of the defendant to the petition
bonds and coupons were sold to, and for value contains a general denial, and also sets forth that
became the property of, the plaintiff, which no petition was ever presented to the County
had ever since been the legal holder, owner, Court of Livingston County by the taxpayers
and bearer thereof; and that the defendant, on of the municipal Township of Chillicothe, as
and after July 1, 1876, had refused to pay any required by the Act of 1868, praying for the
of the coupons then or since becoming due, or election named in the Act; nor did that court
to levy any tax for their payment.
ever order any election to be held in the town-
ship, as to whether it would subscribe any
amount to the capital stock of the St. Louis,
Council Bluffs & Omaha Railroad Company;
nor did the county court ever order, direct or
authorize the bonds or the coupons in question
to be issued; nor was any election ever held in
the township to determine whether it, or the
voters therein, would consent to any subscrip-
tion on its account to the capital stock of the
said railroad company, or to the issuing of the
bonds and coupons; and that the issuing and
delivery of them were without authority of the
county court, and in violation of the Constitu-
tion and laws of Missouri. The answer also
denied that the plaintiff was the owner and
holder in good faith, and for value, of the
bonds and coupons in question.

The provisions of the Act of March 23, 1868, in regard to the issuing of bonds, in the name of a county, in behalf of a municipal township, therein, which apply to the present case, are as follows (1 Wagner Statutes of Missouri of 1870, 313):

The plaintiff put in a replication to the answer, denying each and every allegation of new matter therein contained.

"Sec. 51. Whenever twenty-five persons, tax-
payers and residents in any municipal town-
ship, for election purposes, in any county in
this State, shall petition the county court of
such county, setting forth their desire, as a
township, to subscribe to the capital stock of
any railroad company in this State, building or
proposing to build a railroad into, through or
near such township, and stating the amount of
such subscription, and the terms and con-
ditions on which they desire such subscription
shall be made, it shall be the duty of the
county court, as soon as may be thereafter, to
order an election to be held in such township
to determine if such subscription shall be inade; The cause was in due form heard by the
which election shall be conducted and returns court without the intervention of a jury, and
made in accordance with the laws controlling it made a finding of facts and of conclusions
general and special elections; and if it shall of law in favor of the plaintiff, upon which a
appear, from the returns of such election, that judgment for it was rendered, on the 6th of
not less than two thirds of the qualified voters January, 1885, for $8,476.60, with costs,
of such township voting at such election are in against the County of Livingston, "to be col-
favor of such subscription, it shall be the duty lected, if necessary, by mandamus against the
of the county court to make such subscription County Court of said County, commanding it
in behalf of such township, according to the to levy and collect from Chillicothe municipal
terms and conditions thereof; and if such con- Township, in said County, a special tax ac-
ditions provide for the issue of bonds in pay-cording to law for the payment of said judg-
ment of such subscription, the county court
shall issue such bonds in the name of the
county, with coupons for interest attached;
but the rate of interest shall not exceed ten per
cent per annum; and the same shall be deliv-
ered to the railroad company.

ment, interest and costs, and to pay the same.
To review this judgment the defendant has
brought a writ of error.

The facts found by the circuit court, other
than those which are merely formal, are as
follows: The defendant issued twenty-four
"Sec. 52. In order to meet the payments on bonds, on the 10th of April, 1871, numbered
account of the subscription to the stock, ac- consecutively from 1 to 24 inclusive, signed by
cording to its terms, or to pay the interest and the presiding justice of the county court, at-
principal on any bond which may be issued on tested by the clerk, and with the seal thereof,
account of such subscription, the county court each in the form before set forth, and with
shall, from time to time, levy and cause to be coupons in the form before given. The plaint-
collected in the same manner as county taxes,iff, in April, 1871, bought all of the bonds
a special tax, which shall be levied on all real
estate lying within the township making the
subscription, in accordance with the valuation
then last made by the county assessor for county
purposes.

"Sec. 53. The county treasurer shall be authorized and required to receive and collect of the sheriff of the county the income from the tax provided in the previous section, and to apply the same to the payment of the stock

and the coupons thereto attached and not then
matured, in the open market, for cash, and
without notice of any defect or infirmity there-
in or in the action of the county court in is-
suing the same, and has ever since been and
still is the holder of the bonds and the unpaid
coupons thereon, and, at the time of the insti-
tution of this suit, was the holder of the
coupons then matured and described in the pe-
tition. The bonds were issued under the fol-

[107]

[108]

The election was held on the 27th of May, 1870. On the 30th of May, 1870, the votes cast were duly canvassed, and an abstract thereof was made and entered of record in the county court, signed by the president of that court and a justice of the peace, and attested by the signature of the county clerk, showing that 320 votes had been cast for, and fifty votes against, the subscription of $12,000 to the capital stock of said company.

lowing circumstances: by articles of association | same conditions as before mentioned, the bal-
entered into on the 18th day of June, 1867, lots to be in like form.
and filed in the office of the Secretary of State
of the State of Missouri on the 14th of July,
1868, a corporation was created by the name of
the St. Louis, Chillicothe & Omaha Railroad
Company. The articles declared that the ob-
ject of the association was to construct, main-
tain and operate a railroad for public use in the
conveyance of persons and property, from the
City of Chillicothe, in the County of Living-
ston and State of Missouri, to such point on
the boundary line between Missouri and Iowa
as should be deemed, after actual survey, "to
be on the most direct and feasible route for con
structing, maintaining and operating a railroad
between the said City of Chillicothe and the
City of Omaha in the State of Nebraska;" that
the length of the railroad should be about
ninety miles, and it should be made into or
through the Counties of Livingston, Daviess and
Gentry, and into or through one or more of the
Counties of Nodoway, Harrison and Worth.
The articles also declared that the association
was organized under and subject to the laws
of the State of Missouri contained in chapters
sixty-two and sixty-three of title XXIV of the
General Statutes of Missouri of 1865, possess
ing all and singular the powers therein con-
tained." General Statutes of Missouri of 1865,
326-344.

At a meeting of the stockholders of the St. Louis, Chillicothe & Omaha Railroad Company, held on the 4th of June, 1869, its name was changed, by their vote, to that of the Chillico.be & Omaha Railroad Company, and evidence thereof was filed in the office of the Secretary of State of the State of Missouri on the 25th of June, 1869.

On the 23d of September, 1870, there were filed in the office of the Secretary of State of the State of Iowa articles of association, in conformity to chapter 52 of title 10 and other laws of Iowa, of the Revision of 1860, incorporating the St. Louis, Council Bluffs & Omaha Railroad Company in Iowa, to construct and operate a railroad. The articles contained the following clause: "The main line of said railroad shall extend from and from within the City of Council Bluffs, in the State of Iowa, and from such other point adjacent to the eastern terminus of the Union Pacific Railroad, on the banks of the Missouri River, as the board of directors may hereafter designate; thence in a southwesterly direction to the state line between the States of Iowa and Missouri, at a point where the Chillicothe & Omaha Railroad shall reach said state line, and, in the event of the consolidation of this company and corporation with the said Chillicothe & Omaha Railroad Company, a company incorporated under the general laws of the State of Missouri, then, in connection with the last mentioned railroad, to form a continuous line of railroad from the City of Omaha, in the State of Nebraska, and the City of Council Bluffs, in the State of Iowa, to the City of St. Louis, in the State of Missouri; and the board of directors of the corporation hereby created shall have the power at any time, when the same can be lawfully done, to consolidate this corporation with the Chillicothe & Omaha Railroad, in Missouri, aforesaid, and this corporation shall have, hold, and by its board of directors exercise, all the powers, rights, privileges and franchises granted and conferred by the laws of the State of Iowa, Revision of A. D. 1860, and of all laws amendatory thereof and supplemental thereto." These articles had, on the 13th of September, 1880, been tiled for record in the office of the Recorder of Pottawatomie County, in the State of Iowa.

On the 3d of May, 1870, a petition signed by more than twenty-five taxpayers and residents of the municipal Township of Chillicothe was filed in the County Court of Livingston County, setting forth that the petitioners, as a township, desired to subscribe $15,000 to the capital stock of the Chillcothe & Omaha Railroad Company, subject to the following conditions: 1. Payment of said subscription to be made in bonds of Livingston County (issued in accordance with the law regulating subscriptions by municipal townships to railroad companies), at par; said bonds to be payable fifteen years from the first day of July, 1870, and bearing interest at the rate of eight per cent per annum, payable semi-annually. 2. The bonds to be issued to said company when At a meeting of the stockholders of the Chilit shall have continuously graded its roadbed licothe & Omaha Railroad Company, held on on or near its present located survey from the the 20th of September, 1870, "all the stock of City of Chillicothe to the western boundary of the company being present thereat," a resolu Livingston County." The county court, on tion was passed by the stockholders unanithe 3d of May, 1870, made an order reciting mously, directing the board of directors of the the contents of the petition, and directing that company to effect a consolidation of it with the an election be held at the usual place of voting St. Louis, Council Bluffs & Omaha Railroad [109] in the township, Chillicothe election district, Company, of the State of Iowa. Articles of on the 27th of May, 1870, to determine if such consolidation were, on the same day, entered subscription should be made. The order pre-into between the two corporations, consolidatscribed the forms of the respective ballots, for and against the subscription. On the 25th of May, 1870, the county court made an order that the question to be voted upon at the elec tion so to be held should be whether the township should subscribe $12,000 to the capital stock of the said railroad company, upon the

ing the two into one, "for the purpose of con-
structing, owning, maintaining, using and op-
erating a continuous line of railroad from the
City of Omaha, in Nebraska, and the City of
Council Bluffs, in Iowa, to the City of Chilli-
cothe, in Missouri, under the name of the St.
Louis, Council Bluffs & Omaha Railroad Com

[110]

pany."
." These articles of consolidation were produced in the cause, the court finds that the
executed by the president of the Chillicothe & County of Livingston, in the State of Missou-
Omaha Railroad Company, on behalf of that ri, is indebted to the plaintiff, the First Na-
company, under a resolution of its board of di- tional Bank of Portsmouth, New Hampshire,
rectors to that effect, which was approved by by reason of the nonpayment of the coupons
more than three fourths of all the stock in the described in the petition and the facts afore-
company. The articles of consolidation and said, in the sum of eight thousand four hun-
the proceedings thereon on the part of the Childred and seventy-six dollars and sixty cents
licothe & Omaha Railroad Company were filed ($8,476.60).
in the office of the Secretary of State of the
State of Missouri on the 7th of October, 1870;
and the same articles of consolidation and the
proceedings of the meeting of stockholders of
the Chillicothe & Omaha Railroad Company,
authorizing the consolidation, were filed in the
office of the Secretary of State of the State of
Iowa, on the 19th of December, 1870.

In the year 1871 a railroad was constructed [111] by the corporation acting under the name of the St. Louis, Council Bluffs & Omaha Railroad Company, from the City of Chillicothe, in Livingston County, Missouri, upon and over the line set forth and described in the articles of association filed in the office of the Secretary of State of the State of Missouri on the 14th of July, 1868, to a point on the boundary line between the States of Missouri and Iowa, and has been continued thence to the City of Omaha, Nebraska, and has ever since been operated on that line.

[112]

The County of Livingston paid all the interest coupons on the twenty-four bonds as they respectively matured, to and including those falling due July 1, 1876, from the proceeds of taxes levied in each year upon the taxable property of Chillicothe Township in that County. On the 21st of February, 1877, the County Court of Livingston County entered an order on its records, as follows: "Whereas, by a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in a case wherein Bates County, of this State, was a party, it was held that all township bonds issued under and by virtue of an Act of the State of Missouri entitled 'An Act to Facilitate the Construction of Railroads in the State of Missouri,' approved March 23, 1868, are null and void, owing to the unconstitutionality of said Act, which decision, as we are informed, has since been reaffirmed by the United States Circuit Judge Dillon; and whereas, under and by virtue of said Act above recited, the County of Livingston, for the use and in behalf of the municipal Township of Chillicothe, did, in A. D. 1870, issue and deliver under said Act above recited, to the St. Louis, Council Bluffs & Omaha Railroad Company, a series of bonds, in amount twelve thousand dollars, to run for fifteen years, and each for the sum of five hundred dollars: Now, therefore, It appearing that all of said bonds are null and void, it is hereby ordered that, from and after this date, the treasurer of the county be commanded and directed to refuse payment of said bonds or any of them, together with all coupons for interest thereto attached, in whosesoever hands they may be found, or by whom soever they may be presented, until otherwise directed by this court or by some competent superior authority."

The conclusion of law of the circuit court upon the foregoing facts was in these words: "Upon consideration of the foregoing facts, which constitute all the facts and evidence

There is also found in the record a bill of exceptions. When the plaintiff offered in evidence the twenty-four bonds, the defendant objected, on the ground that the bonds were void on their faces, and showed no authority for their issue. The court overruled the objection and permitted the bonds to be read in evidence, to which ruling the defendant excepted. A like objection and exception were taken by the defendant to the reading in evidence of the coupons sued on. When the plaintiff offered in evidence the tax levies for the years 1872, 1873, 1874, 1875, and 1876, for the purpose of showing that in each of those years the County Court of Livingston County made a levy upon the property in the Township of Chillicothe, of taxes for the payment of the interest on the bonds in question, the defendant objected to the evidence, on the ground that there could be no ratification of the issuing of the bonds, if the issue was unlawful. The objection was overruled, and the defendant excepted. No other exceptions appear by the bill of exceptions.

The grounds urged for reversing the judg ment are: (1) that the statutes of Missouri did not authorize the consolidation of a railroad company organized under the laws of Missou ri with a railroad company organized under the laws of another State; (2) that an authority to subscribe to stock in, and issue bonds to, the Chillicothe & Omaha Railroad Company was not an authority to subscribe to stock in, and issue bonds to, the St. Louis, Council Bluffs & Omaha Railroad Company; and (3) that it does not appear by the face of the bonds, or by the findings of the court, that the county court ordered any subscription for stock in either the Chillicothe & Omaha Railroad Company or the St. Louis, Council Bluffs & Omaha Railroad Company to be made, or that any subscription to the stock of either of those companies was in fact made, or that any stock of either company was ever issued to the County or to the Township.

(1) As to the authority for consolidation: It was enacted as follows by the Act of the Legislature of Missouri, approved March 2, 1869, entitled "An Act to Authorize the Consolidation of Railroad Companies in this State with Companies Owning Connecting Railroads in Adjoining States" (Laws of 1869, p. 75; and 1 Wagner's Missouri Stats. of 1870, p. 314, § 56): "Section 1. That any Railroad Company organized under the general or special laws of this State, whose track shall at the line of the State connect with the track of the railroad of any company organized under the general or special laws of any adjoining State, is hereby authorized to make and enter into any agreement with such connecting company, for the consolidation of the stock of the respective companies whose tracks shall be so connected, making one company of the two, whose

[113]