Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1854-08-10

ng Of this sort is here pretended, and we are at Il
loss to understand upon what principles of law or
Justice the State would defeat the purpose and ruin
the interests or her own grantce-an interest which
she is soIcmuly pledged To preserve and defend.
In his Report, Mr.. EArLE says, that " in relation
10 the ground OH which the end "f the Bridge and
the abrtm, nj are built" there was some msunder-
standing. For this ground g. Mr. HALE seemed TO
nave expected in fee and which declined convey
ing in that way, because suppose tie State might
tl nj i; advisable to retain some control over the
Bridge IN fuiure.'
It is very manifest, that in the opinion Of MIR.
EARLE. iiic conveyance expected by HALE would
take rom Il. State all control over The Bridge III
ruurc," and set the Decd, which i'll his opinion,
would have had this citct, AMI Which he therefore
dcc!iu@,: 10 make, w;s Afterwards actually mdae
under authority from Me Staie.
so much rs 10 tic Decd mad by the State " in re-
laon 10 the ground on which the end of the Bridge
ana the abutncnt built" as 10 the intrinsic
nraning Of said Deed, and lis to the opinion of Mr..
EARLE in relation TO il, who agent for the State
executed it.
But connected with ibis subject. the implied ob-
gaiuns Of the State are not less distinct and strn
gent. than are those express ones referred to. If
one make an express transfer Of prurcriyt to aro cr
he implicitly transfers whatever is indispensable 20
lis proper use anl enjoyment, if sucl, b: in his
power, and be not expressly provided against. To
hinder the proper use, t" defeat tho object "f the
title 10 the r'pcry Implied contracts are such as
the nature Of the casc demands. They are such rs
reason AMI justice dictate from The nature o The
+,ans,ction and which, therefore. ;i" law prcsuncs
tha; every man undertakes 10 pcrvnn The Con-
stitu,in makes 10 distinction between one class o.
contracts an hc u;licr Indeed by rlr III: largest
class Of contracts n evil society," in ihc ordinary
transactions ur life are implied lhc'c would he very
little object in securing he inv"!ahliy Of express
CONTRACTS II those, which arc Implied. M hi b. i'm
aired by Stale legislation. The Constitution is
not clar.cablc with such !ulIv ur Inconsistency.
Every giant in its nature amounts 10 an cxtin-
:uishmcn, OF the .iyit oE the .ranor, and implies
ri.h! no; to rcasscri il. party is, therefore, al
WAYS cst"ppcl by his own grant. low absurd
woull i, !t to provide that an express covenant By
hin. as mui,ucnt attendant upon the estate,
should bind him forever because cNccutory, and
rcstin" Is; acton and :ct, that he might rc-assert
his tllc to the estate and d;spnsscss his grantee
because there was only IN ;mi lied cOnvcnant not
to rc.as<cril." Ifthcrcforc, the granor hc Staie)
retained The Bridge between low-walcr mark and
the centre Il" the river she implicitly barsainc'i with
her grantee to permit him IT, use aud hold so much
thereof as Nas ar,c>sar, Id the :u!l, unnparcd, AMI
proper use of thai w,lr she expressly conveyed t"
hiu And upon thi, principle the granor, ha' in. the
power, w#s equally bnuud in law and good con-
science 10 rcncw the Charles N ,lElf Il the cram
tee since such renewal absolutely IN iispcnSalc
to Tic use and purposes Of The grant. l. these Views,
which are respectfully submitted, be correct, the
City Council Of Augu,tn arc the wncrs of the
Fridge. and are entitled = To uxc hold and enjoy"
the same " solely ,nl oxclusivcy or hrPurpos, o Il
hi hwav agrnst the claim Of The State. and against
every p rson whomsocvcr lawfully Gaining the
same or any par; thcrcof'' The next inquiry will
not ctan rs for any length OF time, for it will not
be seriously denied that thc Charter 10 Acssrs'
| JONES
;iyatc GOOD, and was no founded N public nccrs-
sitv. By i;.,hcy impose upon the public an aid-
riona burihcn without making AM additional advan-
ta.,' in return which in effect is the :cry reverse
ur i,c nvrtiun o! Charter.
Public necessity bcinG ont Of the question. their
Chartcl i att mp;cd 10 b" susanc up' some claim
through s:mrITz & McKiNyE, w!osc right and title
To ,;,c Brid' have been found by The highest judi
ca! tribunals e! his State and Of the United States,
to be utterly wanting anl mercy pretending. The
next inquiry is whether tII City Council of Augusta
can be deprived a. their possession Of this Bridge
:I u| its crnounpn,s for the mere private benefit
Of Mcs.ls. JONES u KENNEDY.
by cmincn, domain understand the " RIGHT
wc., The people (govcrnnicn) retain over The
estates of individuals to resu:n, the same for public
usc." The reservation and exercise o! such right
ar. Indispensable To the praclica! administration o.
government Tie resumption IGwcvcr. must be for
public usr and public only" And even when
resumed or this purpose, the general Op uon is, that
the principles OF ,he Amrrican Constitutions require
,'a compensate on Should be made !" tie owner
ga provision for compensation is Il necessary
attendant on the due and constitutional exercise Of
th power of the law -gyer 10 deprive an indiv dual
of his property without his consent; and ihs Pr'nc-
p!c in American constitutional Jurisprudence, is
founded in natural equity, and is laid down BY ur SIS
as IN acknowledged principle "f universal law"
But when tn" publ necessity does not require 1t,
,rI ,Lc cni.l,urc .l,uuLi vrcltr n Grant Of p:O-
prrty, or Of franchise under the pretert Of some
puJLic use or serrice, such eases would BE- gross
abuses of their discretion and fraudul,n nj attacks OH
private RIGHT and the law would be clearly uncon-
>titui onal and VOID" This is The view of that able
iurist, Chan. KENT Another authority equally
distinguished (Alr. Justice sToar) says, :" it seems
to be the genera opinion fortified by stron3 current
o: judicial opinion, that sncc the American rcvolu-
tou. no State government ean be presumed 10 pos
scss the transc2ndcnial sovereignty to take away
vested rights Of proprrty-to take the property OF y
and transfer il to B by i mere legislative act
THAT q ve:nment can scarcely be deemed to be
free, where the rights of properly are left solely
dependant upon les >a!ivc body without any re.
st,uint The fundamental maxims ot free govern
mcnt seem to require that The right of private
property should be held sacred. AT least, no Court
of Justice in this country, would be warranted in
assuming that any State Legislature possessed
power IL violate AMI disregard them, or that such
power, so rcpugnant TO the common principles o.
Justice and civil liberty, urlrd under any general
grant Of legislative aahory-or ought to be':npIed
u L.