474 HASTINGS—POLICE POWER OF THE STATE. [June 19, 
sons and property at rates allowed by the charter. It was admitted 
into the city of Richmond by special resolution of the city board 
authorizing its location on certain lines. 
When first commencing operation the railroad company was in- 
volved in a controversy with the city authorities as to the drawing | 
of trains with steam power through the city and across Broad street 
to depot and grounds across such street, but was permitted to do so. 
In 1874 an ordinance of the city was passed forbidding to the com- 
pany any use of locomotives on a certain portion of their track 
across and east of Broad street, and providing a penalty of ¢100 to 
$500 for violation of the ordinance. Upon judgment for the pen- 
alty being rendered in the state courts the matter was taken to the 
federal Supreme Court and the action upheld. 
‘All property within the city is held subject to the legitimate control of 
the government, unless prohibited by contract rights, which is not the 
case here. Appropriate regulation of the use of property is not taking it 
within the meaning of the constitutional prohibition.” 
It is also held that as the plaintiff railroad company alone had 
authority to run cars across Broad street, the fact that it alone was 
forbidden by the ordinance from using steam power for such pur- 
pose would not make the ordinance a denial to the company of 
equal protection of the laws. 
At this same session of 1877, the case of 'ex parte Jackson was de- 
cided. ‘The petitioner for writ of habeas corpus and certiorari, 
Jackson, had been convicted of sending through the mails a circular 
advertising a lottery, in violation of a statute of the United States 
providing that lottery advertisements should not be sent through 
the mails, and that one who would knowingly send them with in- 
tent to defraud should be fined. He claimed that the statute was 
unconstitutional and not warranted by any power in Congress, 
that it was only competent for Congress to make necessary arrange- 
ment for the management of the post roads in the carriage of the 
mails, and that the protection of the people from fraud was no part 
of its jurisdiction. 
The court carefully guards the constitutional rights of citizens 
to be exempt from unreasonable searches and seizures, and affirms 
that this provision extends to protection of sealed matters in the 
mails. But it is declared to be in the power of Congress to say 
196 U. S., 7.27. 
