Sunbury American. [volume] (Sunbury, Pa.) 1848-1879, 1852-08-14
AUGUST H. 1852

grants, totally independent Of and unconnec.
ted with each other. Why should one in.
dependent gran, be tackled as proviso upon
another?
Bu, this is not all. The section says
they may construct lateral and branch roads,
and form connections with Philadelphia by
way of the Susquehanna as hereinafter Pror'.
dcd Now these last words must point TO
some mode Of making the road or forming the
connection, for that is the thing 10 be done
as hereinafter provided. And TO satisfy this
call we are directed TO the first proviso,
which points out no mode of exercising the
power at all. 1t declares that any road
through ,ha, valley shall be subjected 10
tax. And is tax imposed by law upon a
road when made, TO be called a mode or
manner of constructing branch roads or ma.
king constructions? The defendants con-
slruc,ion msreads the body Of the section
by assigning an improper meaning 10 the
words, "as hereinafter provided - it mis-.
reads the first proviso by disregarding the
word "any," and declaring that tax is 10
be paid, not on any road, but only on one
made within two years and it misreads the
last proviso by tearing it entirely from the
res, Of the section TO which il properly be-
longs. When the meaning which the defen-
dants would assign 10 the section is express
sed in words it will read somewhat thus -
"The Sunbury and Erie Company may dis
regard the rights and privileges heretofore
vested in the Susquehanna Company, and
construct road as soon as they think pro-
per, by the valley of the Susquehanna, in
tho following manner, that is TO say-any
road, no matter when made, or by whom,
shall be subject 10 tax; and further any
road shall not be subject 10 tax, it being
the legislative will that no tax shall be i'm
posed on the road 10 be made by the Snnbu-
ry and Erie Company, if the Susquehanna
Company shall not also construct a road by
the same route" We cannot read it thus
without doing violence 10 the language and
putting the commonsense Of the Legislature
TO open shame.
am well aware that this minute criticism
upon words and sentences is not the way lc
make statute plain. My only reason Tor /
is found in the vast amount of ingenuity eX
pended on it in the arguments OF counsel
But after all, the best argument is to hold ~
the law and let it speak for itself. Tht
broadcst, plainest and most natural view WI
can take OF it, is the one which brings u
soonest TO the truth. The majority OF ,h
Court have no sort OF doubt that we are bount
10 regard the claim Of the defendants as who'll
unsus'ained.
We are no, dealing with legislative grant
wich conflict, but we are deciding be,wee
two demands Of right, TO which one part
has title and the other not. The cons,i'u
, tional question, whether the Legislature wouI
have a right 10 authorize the making of
second road, does not arise, because no sue
, authority has been given. When an inte
| ference with the rights Of railroad compan!
like the one complained OF here, is saltogeiht
| without authority OF law, we think the inju
/ ed corporation has right 10 all The reli'
= which equity can give.
t will close by briefly recapi,ula,ing.
0 is very improbable that the Legislature IL
Q tended these two companies to make tv
: roads over the same ground. The right
n the Susquehanna Company is plainly gran
, ed, and is not denied The supplement
4 the Sudbury and Erie Company must
: construed siictly, not only because that
e the rule for all public grants, but becau
y this particular grant cannot be supposed
r have been Intended. But while the slTicte
construction is the only proper one, no inte
IS prelaion could be latiudinary or loo
l. enough to give it the meaning which the d
If PENDANTS insist. upon. The Susquehan
is Company have the right 10 make the 'oa
e provided they commence and finish ii vii
e in the time limited By law, and the Snnbu
IA aud Erie Company have no authority Civ
them for iha, purpose, unless the other col
h pany shall fail.
is And now, TO wit, on the 9th day OF Ju
o. 1852, on reading the bill of complaint, a
VI affidavits filed in this cause, and on argum'
10 of counsel for both parties, the Court ore
'e that the Sunbury and Erie Railroad compaI
IN and all and every OF its officers, agents, wo
is men and servants, be strictly and finally
o' Joined and commanded, that they do ab
'e lutely cease and desist from all further P
st. secuion of the work, and from all the a
Up aud doings complained of in said bill, III
in the final nearing and determination OF
ei cause, and that wri, Of injunction be issu
he upon the plaintiffs giving bond in The sum
oi Slo; 900, according TO the statute in such C
10 made.
: JOEL ROBINSON, THE BoATMAs.- Robins
,y the fearless boatman, who rescued the Fl
nd erman, on Monday 26lh inst, says the b
oy 10 Commercial Advertiser, from the rap
a. above the Horse Shoe Falls, AT Niagara
&C. The same gallant fellow who saved The
ar penier, a few years ago, who fell from e
,er Island Bridge, and was carried by the iorr
1 10 a small Island near the Hogs Back, alb
he the American Fall. No other man but
h;pson dared undertake The fearful task