Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1860-06-02
The Railroad Case.

Alter careful cGnSlderatlon OF tne oplh-
ion of the Court of Appeals in the case of the
Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac
Railroad Company, VS.. the Virginia Central
and Orange and Alexandria Railroad Compa-
MES, the undersigned, Counsel for the APP
pellees, are of opinion that the following IS
correct exposition of that opinion, viz:
]. That the Virginia Central Railroad was
lawfully constructed from Richmond TO Cor
louisville.
2. That the Orange and Alexandria Railroad
was lawfully constructed from Alexandria to the
same point.
3 That each road may carry passengers to that
point, and to intermediate points
t. That the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Po-
tomac Company is entitled TO the "long," or
Through travel only, and that the long or
! through traveller is Il person who starting from
Richmond or some point South OF it, goes to
| Washington or some point North OF 1t, ct race
CeT&d.
5. That the Appellces shall not by any agree.
ment transport such passengers from Richmond
| to Alexandria, or Alexandria TO Richmond, by
running their cars through from one of those ter
mini to the other.
| g. They shall not give through tickets or through
checks, whether sold at the tornni or on the cars
| or not, to such passengers.
T. They shall not take such passengers ateitheI
of the termini, who to be carried through m'h-
| out change Of cars.
s. That no placara or notice shall be Published
informing the public that such passengers may be
carried from one terminus to the other, without
change of cars, or by continuous und unbroken
railroad.
9. That the appellant is entitled to an account
of the toss Of damage which it has sustained by the
encroachments of the appellecs upon its rights in
carrying such through passengers by continuous
railroad.
10. That i'll taking the account, it should be as
sumed that all the travellers from Richmond tc
| Alexandria, ur Alexandria to Richmond, who
went with through tickets, were travellers from
| Richmond to Washington, Ell rice rcrSd, with tht
right in the nppcllees to show that such was not
the fact, that such passengers co"hd not, OF
couM not, "by reason of ice III the Potomac or tor
any other cause, have taken the limo OF the ap
pcIlant, if there had been no such continuous ano
uninterrupted line OF travel 10y means OF through
tickets, and through fares, with through tol
baggage, established and conducted by the roads
| of the appellees.'
And the result of this ruling is
|. That the appcllecs may, sevcrally, carry
upon their roads any and every passenger who may
| offer to GordonsvilIc without regard to the place
| from which they came, or to the point to which
| they desire to go, beyond Gordonsvlllc, provided
| therc be change Of ears and roads at GordonS
ville and no through ticket or through checks
to Richmond or Washington, or points beyond
| those.
| g. That through tickets may be given from
| Richmond to Alexandria, "nd To amy point
| South of Alexandria, for local paSSen gers; from
| Alexandria to Richmond, and to amy point
| North of Richmond, for local passengers from
any point North of Richmond to AlcXandria--
| from any point South of Alexandria to Rich
mond.
3. That the appellant is entitled to no compen
| satiou for passengers who could not or would not
from any causc have taken the road OF the appel
liant if the roads Of the appeliccs had not been open
ut the time Of travel, and who therefore took the
roads of the appcccS.
t. That the Appellant is entitled only to the nett
! profit of the passengers who were transported by
the Appellees in violation Of the guarantee, II the
transportation Of such passengers would have cost
| the Appellant anything beyond Its daily current
expenses. without such transportation; because
the Appellant is by the decree entitled only TO the
loss or damage which it shall have sustained; and
o course, the payment by the Appclees OF cost
Transportation, which the Appellant would have
| been compelled to pay, if it had not been PAID
by the Appeees, has occasioncd no loss to the Ap-
| pellant
! 5 That an Injunction should he awarded to
restrain the AppelIecs their agents and all others
from farther encroachmentS upon the rights oil the
Appellants AS before defined, and that an account
| should he ordered of the loss damage which the
| Appellant has sustained 10y the encroachmcnt OF
the AppelIceS upon its rights, in carrying paSsen-
| gers from Richmond to Washington, by continn-
Gus or unbrokcn railroad, i'll ears running through
| from Richmond to Alexandria, or from Alexandria
| to Richmond, and who could. and would, at the
| time OF the travel, have Travelled upon the road
of the Appellant ifthc roads OF the Appclices hao
not been open, and to prevent the use or the pa
| cards BEFORE mentioned.
JAMES Lyons, Counsel Tor the
Tucker aud PATTON, Va. Z. H. 90.
ROBERT Il. SCOTT, Counsel Tor lhe
WM. GREEN, y. a. IT, II. 20.