Meigs County telegraph. [volume] (Pomeroy [Ohio]) 1848-1859, 1853-04-26

Dsrict Court within The meaning Of the
statute.
An objection Of considerable Iorce has
been urged that the Judge Of the Couu Of
Common Pleas who Needles case and dis
solves an injunction, may on an appeal being
taken. as Judge Of The District Coun, re-
new the order. This would seem 10 follow
as necessary consequence from the con-
slruclion | have given 10 the art, as each
Judge of the DisIrici CourI possesses equal
power. This, however presents no greater
difficuliy'in Tho case OF granting injunclohs,
An order granting or dissolvng an Injunction
is merely inlerlocutory. Ii is moi final or
decisive Of the case, and sense Of proprie-
" on the part OF the Judges must be relied
on 10 guard against any abuse Of power.
! regard this law as most beneficial. A
power 10 grant injunclions is most useful
power; bul there was difficulty in It's use
growing out Of the restraint on the power Of
the Judges TO dissolve injunclions once grant
ed. The law provides mode by which
this may be done. - l0'
The complainant is a stakeholder in the
HiIlsbonugh and Cincinnati, Railway Com.
pany, and complains Of violations Of The
charter OF that Company on The part Of Di.
rectors. The company is about 10 extend
It's road eas. from HlIsborodgh TO point,
opposite. or near Parkersburgh. 10 connect
with the North Western Virginia Railway;
various objections are taken on .Iie par. Of
the complainant. ID seems that the original
intention was 10 connect with road 10
Chillico,he, but This not being successful,
there were projecis for Two rival roads, and
il is commended lha, llie extension now pro.
posed will be injurious 10 both roads. As 10
This mauer the Directors must exercise their
discretion. In d case Of fraud Cour
might inlerefere, but Eol where il is mater
of discretion with those called upon 10 act
From any thing that appears. The acts pro.
posed are NOT in conflict with The interests
of the stockholders -hdeed, the evidence
shows that the route on which the Directors
propose TO build The road, is lhe best.
The act Of the Legislature authorizing an
extension ole the road east of Hillsborough.
was passed on the l2ih March, 1851. And
it is first objected thai the route authorized
by iha, acl is located and cannot be changed.
After the adoption Of that acl by The Drec
Tors, The stockholders resolved 10 adopt a
particular route eas, Of llIlsborough known
as The Paint Valley roule. The Directors
resolved TO construct about II miles Of the
road on that route. They went further and
entered into contract for It's construction.
| 1t is conlended thai this was location OF
The road and The Directors canno, change
it. Ii has been decided, and is reasonable,
that road when once located, cannot b.
changed by The Dir, clors; but many things
may be done which do or d." no, amount IL
a location. Making survey is no location
it has no binding effect. So with rcsolu
lions, unless acs have been done giving
.ighs under them, but ii does not appear
that there were any such rights in this
cause.
Ii appears thai stock was subscribed viii
a view 10 this route. This might or nigh
not have had some effect, bul il could have
given righl Of complaint only 10 The stock
holders so subscribing, or those residing or
The route which has been abandoned. The
complainant lis got in this situation. There
appears TO have been no bad faith in ,his
respect on The part OF the Directors, and i
: There were, The complainant would hav,
been preeluded by having himself advocated
"a change from this same Paint Valley roule
do no. regard anything done by The Com
pany as a location. The contract for III,
construction of The fourteen miles OF tn,
road was conditional. The resolution II
locate and construct was like any other res
l. olu,ioh. A company like an individual ma,
change its mind. 1t would be u"lonunat
if il could NOT; and il has full power 10 do S,
unless rights intervene.
Another objection is taken that The gene
raj idea in the charter is that the road shal
extend 10 Marietta as terminus, and lha
the present idea of The Directors is 10 90 I,
point opposite 10 Parkersburgh and stol
short Of Marieua. The evidence in th
case shows that The route on which il is nov
proposed TO build the road is the best rou
TO Marietta. ! suppose Iha. The COMPANY
, would have The right 10 build The road b,
piecemeal, even without The express provis
ion in The chaner. The company is doin,
no act by which they will be prevented from
going to Murieua. They intend 10 join lh
Northwestern Virginia Railroad. Th
power 10 do so seems full and ample, and
do no, see that they are exercising an,
power or lalling short Of any du.y in ,hi
rtspect.
Ills said that The Company, meaning til
i stockholders as a body, alone can alter III
S route, and distinction is drawn bewee
n acts to be done by the corporaiors, and b
the Board Of Directors. | suppose that un
: der the charter Of this company, The powe
: To act in this respect is in the Directors. =
e The Legislature intended that The acts done
: should be by mode prescribed by law, an
p no mode is prescribed by which ,he stock
r holders are TO ucl as body except in tn
e election Of Directors.
Il 1t appears that this company is issuirg il
!. bonds, and charge is mdde that The Direc
{ tors are gully Of a violation of their duty i
g selling bonds 10 be converted into stock
S This may be bad policy and if done in frau
d or in any evasion Of any prohibition ol lhei
h charter, The coprt would interfere. Th
i company has fighl TO issue bonds for lh
e purpose Of raising money, and 10 allow III
e holders Of those bonds TO convert them I'M
n stock. But if this should be done, as hu
been suggested, not in goodIlai but Ic
m tho ntirnasa oc kpanin0 tho control nj, nh