Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1854-08-24


be, we submit practically to invest it in the City
Council Of Augusta. For so long as they have the
authority of the State Of Georgia, to keep gate ut
that end Of this Bridge, they are virtually possessed
of both the property and the franchise, and can
levy contributions in defiance of our authority.
They were well aware Of this fact and hence their
failure for years to apply to this State for Charter
And it was only BY investing our portion of this
franchise in J. & X, and authorizing them to
erect Toll Gate to take tolls and at this end, that
We ever brought them to terms, and caused them
to gu into the Federal Courts, to determine the
question Of their power 10 cucct full tolls, at pleas
urc, under only partial Charter.
Now it is true, if Messrs. Joyrs g. KENNEDY had
been created corporation by the Legislature, this
franchise would be rcpcaable. The State, by the
Act Of her Legislature in lS4l, having reserved to
herself this power over those artificial bodies Tho
history of that Act is well known. 1t was passed
just at the close Of that celebrated contest between
the State and The Banks, in which the Legislature
attempted to insert pruviso in their several Char
ters, that suspension Of specie payments, By them
thereafter should work. IA forfeiture of their Char
tiers end the Courts very properly decided that no
authority was vested in the Legislature, TO add to
or take from, the corporate power Of these insttu-
tions. 50 long the act of incorporation had an
existence. The Banks had triumphed over the peo-
pie; and il WAS to prevent this contingency from
again Occurring, and 10 provide check upon the
power Of these non;ed corporations, that the Leg
'saturc wisely resolved 10 pass the act in question.
Indeed for Il long time This act, WIS, from the cir
cu"stanccs attending its passage though, to be IN
applicable TO any other species Of corporations but
Banks but it has been decided by the Courts. that
l.alr-ads, and indeed all other corporations, are
subject to its provisions. Bat Us Messrs. JONES &
kESSEDY do not possess the first attribute Of u
corporate body, it is unnecessary, we presume, 10
pursue this branch of the subject any further.
Som, m,lhing is suggested, however, in the memo
rial as to their constituting quasi corporation, but
the position does be seriously pressed,
we will dispose Of it by short quotation from An
SELL Il AMEs ON Corporations, (Sec. 25, page 81
OF the Introduction to that work
There may be also prirate corporations, created
with powers sub mo20 and for a lew specified pur-
poses only, and which are probably quasi corrora-
tons. The jo.nt-stuck Banks irsEnglund OF modern
creation, called into existence by the act Of Geo.
w., are considered quasi corporations, US that act
provides ir the continuance Of the partners, not
wI'l'san'ing change of partners. In this case the
partnership has the corporate attribute of succession
And ninoring Stock Company was deemed quasi
corporation, because suit ior drmanl against the
Company might, by virtue of in act Of Parliament,
be bluuS It against the directors Here is attached
,liul,l L.
the names of each Individual partner composing
tie Company. The General Assembly of the Pres
syt ran Chu ch in Pennsylvania, is not quasi
Corporation; because it has not the capacity to sue
and bc sued. as an artificial person and quasi
corporation is also established by lap, but that AS
scmbly is not"
So It will be seen by the authority just quoted,
that quasi corporations are, themselves, artificial
persons" and can only be created by law,"-
they can be sued also, ,1ithout the names of each
in9:cidaal partner being used.1 They must be
possessed also Of the corporate attribute of sue
ccsSioa." None of these attribute se-l f
SSS.-. ESNEDY are sup
posed to possess they are, therefore, not believed
to be quasi corporation.
In conclusion, We mus: be permitted to say, that
the author Of this memorial evidently does not un-
dcrstan! much less appreciate, the high grounds Of
public policy by which the Legislature of ls53 was
:c;uacd in comforting this grant upon Nlessrs ONES
& KENNEDY. He stcns to suppose that it was
ted in those gentlemen, as the ussignees Of llEsRY
SnuLrz. No view Of this subject could be more
erroneous, or farther removed from the tiuh The
truth is, the Legislature were well aware, that S.
| h,.b b,J, Il. q, a.; D,:J I,
thereof, by the sale made under the authority of the
Fedora! Court, years ago, and ut which the Bank
Of the State of Ceorgi became the purchascrs.-
They placed their grant upon different grounds, and
were actuated by far higher impulses They gave
the grant to JONES s. KENNEDY, because they were
the only applicants therefor, and for the purpose of
asserting the jurisdiction oi the State Of South Cao-
Ina to the centre Of tho river-takns possession, in
the most efficient manner they knew how, Of that
portion Of this structure within that jurisdiction
and Of viudcatng the righ and honor Of the State,
both Of which had been assaled and outraged by
the persistence Of the City Counciluf Augusta-and
in defiance her authori,y-or years, to levy tribute
upon her citizens ut the GeorgI, end OF this Bridge
The State through her Legislature, had tried other
means, 10 get the possession Of her portion of this
structure, and to abatc the nuisance of tribute be-
ing levied upon the public at the other end Of the
Bridge but they were Intellectual. She had granted
Charter in 1913, and again in 1852, and cure
tul was she Of the pubic pocket, that the provso
was inserted in both grants, that the community
should not be subjected to the payment Of double
tolls. But that measure failed to reach her end and
! [el' far short Of her aim. And why? Because tho
City Council Of Augusta utterly failed to recognize
her just right. They held they keys Of the gate at
the Georgia end, and closed it at pleasure, upon all
persons who refused to pay them tribute under their
unauthorized demand Of full tolls But when pos
session is taken of our end aiso and gate erected
thereon, it becomes ilro edged s,00rd, ;" and cuts
both ways! Hence their suit in the Federal Court
against JONES s. KENNGDv, "tor the disturbance.
OF THEIR FRAScnIsE.!' (can human arrogance go
farther ?? and which will we hope, forever and final
ly SETTLE this vexed question.
We do not wish to bo understood as being the
authorised apologis,s OF Aessrs JONES g. KENNEDY
in this matters We would gladly have seen this
franchise conferred upon others. The own .Coun-
ell Of Hamburg, for instance, had we think, the
greater claim to the grant; but they were not ap-
pcaDts, and the present grantees We're: And the
Legislature could not longer remain Indifferent, and
allow the State TO be despoied Of her interest in this
valuable property by their default. They were, we
submit, compelled to act. They have acted and
we onnlaud them f,r IL CAROLINA