The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-03-17

existing which clearly defined and in ho statute
book General Assembly Two READS would
in harmony with each oher fulfil OF her creation
Take the very which your Honor has referred When
tho Court decided that the Columbia and Augusta
Railroad Company could cross the ae ct the sa' oarohs
Railroad near Columbia it emphatcay right OF way by
necessity They compelled pass the track oethcl
the Greenvie and Coumba South Carolina Railroads by
the very terms of the charter The n were Xed and
coud not come in or go without crossing the other
of the roads named 1t absolutely night OF way ny
necessity Yet what did the Court OF Errors They
decided that the right to be exercised III TO
the rights of the elder grant .--...., -
Judge WilardTha said in reference othe joint user
of the roads, -
Mr. ConnerThat is all we say mere except lhaC ser
applies to our lands -
But have gone little more into this argument than in
tended and turn now to another branch Of the question
we ask of this tribunal that shall not be depoed of
property without adjudication of the right we 40 not ask
your Honors judge the right but to see that the right
adjudged.
Take rapid glance the papers and history of the hga
ton The first paper petitions to that we hed
in which raised questions of law and right ana ASKED that
they should be adudged before the properly shouo oe
from u.s. gauae of COMPLAINTS that we stand before
this Court despoed of our property without any o
rights We argued the question before nage Pat ana
that his Honor was similar opinions thought nferrblo
from these words of the order: Tie petitioners arc entitled
the prayed for good and sufficient ground is
subsequently on the 18th of December pressed with
much consistent with respec that those
words brought up the whole question OF legal oat we
were be able to carry his Honor with us
in that of the Touse his own language regarding
myself as only constituted judicial agent OF the State
under the Act No A. do not deem myself at liberty to enter
the simple one hndrance We pressed upon Judge att
one of two thngsether decide the question of right him
self or to- allow that question decided before the order for
the Jury was made had his Honor said in words
leave the question of right to be determined by the Judge
before whom the equity cause is re we Mo" nos nave
here on this prohibitions 1t urged that Judge Plat had
nothing do with the question: but to act mnlsteray
that however was overrued 1t then urged that il could
be properly left to decision Of tho Court Of Equity but
upon Judge Boozer with great energy that Judge Patt had
ruled this point and that he had right to CONSIDER it, Had
the Other side never could made the argument which they
did, that what Judge Patt said bat what he da that
binding on Judge Boozer
The Chief usce-Bu understood the order of Judge
Willard granting c injunction, only gave liberty TO the
defendants for dissolution of the injunction on
proof that they have duly acquired the right to or the
of construction upon the premises claimed by the COM
painants.
Mr. Conner-That the gist Of argnmene We con
tended that "duy acquired legally acquired and that
where the right denied it could not be legally acquired
ud determining the right 1t was our anxious
desire that between the two tribunals the question Of right
should not be allowed TO fall to the ground.
Judge Wiard-udge Patt states in his decision ~ that
after petitioners shall have ascertaned the qum OF compen
saton and have paid rendered it. they must necessarily
back to Court of Equity in order to get the Injunction
removed and before they ask its removal they must snow
only that they have rendered the but
they have acquired the right Gas provided Judge Willard
injunction ordcr Their snt in equity now pending on the
equity side Of the Court Of Common Pleas OF khand County
embraces the whole right and every point must
necessarily audcatcd pon when they apply for leave TO
proceed with their road =, :.
it was said Judge Boozer will decide the right in the equity
cause but when we got the equity it was said to
Judge Boozcr you 60 behind the order for compensation
granted by Judge Pa Here is the certificate that the COM
pensaton has been paid and by the payment the right is ac
qured ~,
argument was pressed that the opinion of Judge Plat had
decided the question of right?
Mr. Memmnger-That Of che propositions: but the
counsel will b. fair enough that there were many othef
arguments used.
of Tantaus was We had the law all around U.S. but could
not bring principle to bear Before Judge Pla it was said
Judge Boozer will decide before Judge Boozer was said
u re- Pat had already decided and between the two stools
the right May tpease the Court it was reark
bly, we'll done.
roiterate that the question Of right has been decided
Anxious have been to test the question on It's merits not
vet have we had fair hearing of the Before one tl
buna certain part of the has been before
another tribunal certain other issues have been urged but there
has never vet been tribunal before which all the issues could
receive a lust hearing until reached this Court
The Chief uscef Judge Boozer took tho view that the
right had been established strikes me that 1t was OF hnal
character and you could have appealed.
Mr. Conner-How could we? Hc simply dissolved the in
junction without comment There opinion given and
all we know that his Honor had filed order to that
effect.
Now all the proceedings in the ease have been printed and
are before this Court except that order OF Judge booze which
is in manuscript and where you lay your finger upon line
in which this question of right has been adjudgcd?
Are we not entitled that? We ask no "Duy ac
4lo