This case was a dispute between the East Tennessee, Virginia and Georgia Railroad Company (ETV&G) and the Southern Telegraph Company (STC). The ETV&G had a contract with the STC to provide telegraph services along the railroad's lines. The STC failed to fulfill its obligations under the contract, and the ETV&G sued for breach of contract. The Supreme Court held that the ETV&G was entitled to damages for the breach of contract. The Court also held that the ETV&G was entitled to an injunction against the STC, preventing it from interfering with the ETV&G's use of the telegraph lines. The Court further held that the ETV&G was entitled to an accounting of the profits made by the STC from its use of the telegraph lines. Finally, the Court held that the ETV&G was entitled to an award of attorney's fees and costs. The Court's decision was a victory for the ETV&G, and it established the principle that a party to a contract can be held liable for damages for breach of contract.

Justice Field delivered the dissenting opinion in East Tennessee, Virginia and Georgia Railroad Company v. Southern Telegraph Company. He argued that Congress had not intended to grant exclusive rights of telegraphy over railroad lines when it passed the 1866 act granting a right of way for railroads through public lands. The majority opinion held that this was an implied power granted by Congress, but Justice Field disagreed with this interpretation because he believed there was no evidence in either the text or legislative history of such intent on behalf of Congress. Furthermore, he maintained that if such an expansive power were to be granted then it should have been done explicitly rather than inferred from general language used in the statute itself. In conclusion, Justice Field argued against giving any special privileges or powers beyond those specifically enumerated by Congress as part of its 1866 act regarding railroads and their use of public lands.