The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1869-01-29


the land of third his authority held
That the law And the South Carolina Raioad Corporation did
invoke the aid of the Court of Chncey But that Court
one hear of writ Of prohibition that ground You have
delay a sufficient groSnd then it would authorize pro
ton ior everything Objectionable more especially in this case where 20"
Your will find that t, matter underwent examination
England in the famous of Home the Earl of Camden
cccs up Judges gave an opinion
the House of Lords That the whole of this great
deal OF laid the Patt and Boozcr if
the committed of law and the subject matter of
whole question finally ltma be of delay but eventually
the justice of the be determined here As said before
subject which will be found in the case of Leonard g
Richardson L. r. Ill and will take the liberty Of reading what
observe The ground prohibition is that the
Magistrate and freohodcrs assumed to decide the relation of
landlord and existing John Mc(oo the rclor
without receiving such evidence the rcaor offered which he
assumed the power dispensing with such legal @ Evidence r the
retor had right by law introduce show that he the
time the the applicant that he had right
possession by tenancy others Thcc wide
difference the Court otwem the different modes of bringing
superior risdiction and they ought be confun1cd
desire to do Justice forum when it should be applied for in
another The true office writ of prohibition enable the
superior Courts to of judgment be done
cero but restrain the uurpaions of inferior tribunals
compel them to observe the limits of their jurisdiction
State Nahns preliminary question Which this case presents
is whether prohibition the remedy The Court The
@ e %oqs paly n % rpe rere Sst where r n n0@ c t
had jurisdiction and the appeal will any
not TO have been granted"
Now please the Court if You sitting
Sessions could grant this writ Judge
to have jurisdiction have read that clause of the
gives him exclusive jurisdiction all similar So Judge oozcr
had jurisdiction the Which them for
your onors to decide but that the of w and
press upon your attention There number the Eng
Sh Courts to the effect but it cucumber
ask Ionos take the grounds which this suggestion
an a and See s how % far they have % eo% a cleared of difficulty by the
Of the proposition that all the proceedings the Irregular
",tc manner by which lands the right of lands may be
taen and does not confer the right to take said lands of
within his jurisdiction and he made mistake
but M it is certainly no matter for prohibition
condemned this right way granted by the State to the
South Company; that the lands sought to be con-
@ G'1 11d % ve 'n' % e n 1S'd Of y G Fs? e
eminent domain appears that corporation claims invade the
@ a & s a"norv %%a m % sHsre % Of to 3 its
power given by the sovereign owe either in terms or by
neesssary implication and that PRESUMPTION of such delegation Of
road between tcrnni"i'
the South Carolina Railroad Company, that the grant this land
them by the State of their franchises exclusive privileges
the South Carolina Railroad We do propose thing
hem We are simply asking condemn piece land owned under
question of law question within the competency the
Court and whichever the Circuit Court decide claim
with it by prohibition.
well this stage of the upon
that point which appropriately unr proposition
namely that the South Carolina Railroad
trial They have filed Court of Emty
When the up there the Court question but
tat they have right preliminary trial before upon
land deny The right Of eminent domain of the State beyond
DOUBT be exercised by the Legislature and when
there end Of all question That body have right deal with
the subject matter Of eminent domain they please and the dis
tnctn draw this at whenever railroad which is given
certain amount OF land for right of confines operations within
the limits Of the line secured By the Legislature charter
the right of eminent domain has fully exercised that land
the railroad has mucon bc right under according law
Of the State.
Mr. Justice Wlard-Do you that where right is given
general terms land is clly open between points?
+ Mr. Mcnmn ser\ny land the location other words
mean that WHEN the has located its line all the land
within sixtyvc feet of that line such be the limit has been sub
ectod to the Legislative cxcrci, of the right of eminent dom,in
Mr. Justice Wiard-D, you deny the jurisdiction equity
determine that there mislcation is taking
particular class of property where obstruction unnecessary?
Mr. Mcmmingcr sir. What claim * that gen 3rdI
the preliminary trial for the purpose Of aceranng whether the
right Of eminent domain has been exercised Rail
road Company by the State land within
line OF location the eminent domain further
preliminary trial is enable that corporation
such land and It's condemnation Why. what prelm-
trial for not the State the proper Interpreter Of the