The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1869-01-29
IN THE SUPREME COURT.
Columbia S. c., January 29, 1869.
ARGUMENT HONORABLE c. G. MEMM1NGER, COUNSEL


We make such that which they describe We do
claim their land shall up right inch of until
Court So that the Whole cnmor raised here and elsewhere can With
very o% S na " ? n meer VIC can make
railroad to Augusta road parallel with that of the South
@ a are p do o" @ lands No % sn nsT w
has aroused their feelings such extent in this matter the know
edge that about deprive that of large of
Hence the longer this agitation be kept alive the longer
will they continue to make profit of five ten thousand dollars
month If they lose will not be due to the fact that have
gone on their land but because we have built road Build
your onors groram" of the 1t will deprive them
that which for rtysx they have imposed upon every
which nitcs New York with New Orleans @ and v C % m tr
abstraction from his purse of toll seventy miles
Carolina Railroad Therefore is that this controversy has been kept
up and we have been fought the death vain
therefore, for them they have hatoned this
On the 11h of April 1867, Company
filed bill this Court i'll which they set forth the invasion of their
ns % s by the & Columbia and Augusta % Raoad Company and among
and Hamburg Railroad Company mpairs the obligation of the
and privileges granted said with repugnant
TO- and dcraon of the rights powers and privileges vested
That the projected track of the said Co.
no and d. augusta M Rsoad & points and places already
orat and for considerable distance wnty thirty mes)
granted your right way a competing road"
TO that bill the defendants filed admitting that they
about their road land that granted them right of
The Court will observe that this is Of the points
such clear cnciton judicial opinion The Chancellor says
behalf
privilege establish and maintain railway communication between
Charleston and Hamburg attaches every of their
idc and parallel with their road from Grantcvil Hamburg
distance of ten twelve miles otherwise than
the selected be found by the defendants for their projected
Hamburg is therefore "auth%pcd b by their caar glance
the map will show that Gantevic is very nearly if not altogether
Hamburg it is conceded that the only practicable railway
s that by the valley of Horse Creek Other for their road
obstacles too formidable to be overcome save by an outlay of
Ss capital & wholly beyond the means and Of the defendants To
Greek is disable them utterly from completing their projected
That route therefore, the only practical route that remains to the
defendants Are they entitled to pursue it?'
No Now your 0naTS % ossrre that in the " d%Snt of the cg this
self in this opinion he goes tosay:
"In proposing adopt
acting in good faith and because they
TRUTH regard % that route as the most desirable and the best had
Hamburg the coincidence the tracks of the
% ito %| or Ss fGa it's n0 mmsn nnvs ] In % carrying @
considerably from the direct line between
parties from Ganitevic Hamburg very
vergence when at the date of its charter the plaintiffs State
right such road by at least the straight and direct
Ganeye Grant though pursuing for some ten Or twelve miles course
ured powers by certainly
derogaon of retained by the General Assembly
plaintiffs road reserved
Columbia passing by Granevlc, thence Hamburg
track along the and involving for that dis
remarked the plaintiffs exclusive privilege is restricted railway
between the points indicated their charter and the
City of Charleston But the projected road of
stiutcs and neither in whole part railway
municaton with Charleston How blame the de-
PENDANTS Tor proceeding with their road from Hamburg Grantevc
when in so doing they pursuing with slight devaons the
course to Columbia and connng themselves
OF their road is concerned within the limits
Such was the decision of the Chancellor but it appealed
and IN the thirteenth volume of Richardson will be found the
Judcam The decision Of the Court is in Il few lines:
whilst therefore, the Court recognizes the abstract
defendants and arms the decree of the the
questions considered by him. will retain the bill and cndcavor under
to fix the relative rights and duties of the parties respect the
crossing and also to settle al points Of dispute the parties
connected with the main Subjects which have been brought
adjudication"
Now If the South Carolina Railroad Company
have their rights determined here the
they not in the Supreme Court have made all the
the place. Judiciary competent decide case and
why did they not there seek that justice which they loudly
hndn here Let them They chose further aid
W " 'o"r but went outside filed BILL raising very
questions involved in the former and claimed this pre-
nay inquiry In that bill they asked injunction to
sup proceeding with the construction of the road All
u nave ocrn reached the other nevertheless
*' kn"h t." themselves they passed that by, before