The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1866-1891, 1869-02-27

statehouse or land already appropriated to highly l
lion II would be question of legislative intent and 1T
"coud no, be presumed that the Legislature intended th
"power conferred BY them should have such al en0o' ~
were unequivocaly expressed. ,
Judge Wlard-What do you hold to be the rule %nere
charter granted general terms to construct roau
two tera and there definition OF location mads o"
could the determine the proprety OF the
Mr. Conner-It difficult to answer the general question IN
that way The first would naturally De tne sno!s
line bt here questions with reference to devlahons
which would necessarily result from as iof
q factory. .-,.. ,,d ~ root tho
Judge Willard-but on Wna6 Iouhoauon "oo'o JOo ~ -
Mr. Conner-on wise application by the Court OF @ the
measure of rights "c sre tuo aienum leda The
question of location of detail dependant on Prnc
ple but on circumstances o;.-o
JUDGE Wilard-Does not depend reasonable necessity
" r instance the case OF the crossing of these two roads
at Columbia That allowed not because was an absolute
but a reasonable necessity. r. :. ;.
me- as well as any other contend that we have SHOWN
there right Of way By grant, that whatever poMer S
Columbia and Augusta Railroad Company possess
Judge Willard apprehond that will hardly bo questioned
that independently of the grant Of the charter the eighth sec
ton confers any right whatever So that after ALL your whole
case is narrowed this point Had you 10
the Act of 1863 right this location? 1t So had the 90
umba and Augusta Railroad Company not right to seek
under the authority of the of 1868 by the there
named And there legal exception to granting the
franchise and that had been cleared away b the h sec
ton can they not 90 with the consrucon AS In the case
OF the crossing at Columbia while there no absolute rh
conferred by the charter the Court recognized question
right
Mr. Conner-We the right to build the road under
the charter that charter gives to take our Land OF
the property of any fo P a ANU Do ns
that the dves rights derived from the ACT
1868 This therefore the ISSUE Have the Legislature gwen
thai power not have they the right to give t2 We concede
that but have they done so? exists must be declared
in express terms and there end to the question
Judge Ward-It may be assumed that there IS ohooe
location and by simply changing the location you take the
entirely of the eighth sections so that after ALL the
right of the Columbia and Augusta Railroad under
the charter seek suitable route somewhere lies at the
bottom Of this
MR. Conner-The right eXrcse their chartered power TO
fulfil the objects of their creation concede but when they
seek to destroy previously existing rights they must snow
either that the Legislature has expressly authorized them TO
do So or that absolutely necessary The Act contains
such They must therefore, prove the neces
that they must either condemn this property vested
In the South Carolina Railroad Company or be pecuded from
CARRYING out objects for which they were chartered
lust there that have been anxious to make our hight Ihe
very point suggested by your Honor the issue we nave en-
deavored throughout the controversy because 1t is an
issue factan issue to be determined py survey Ine
doctrine of necessity that unless they over our one
hundred in other words appropriate 1T to their own
use their enterprise will fail Now are all OF US more
or less familiar with that country We Know that tnere Is no
mountain range no swamp obstacle different from that
which every railroad compelled surmount In the course OF
its construction and if it be alleged that to throw this corpora
ton y feet out of the line is to prevent the compile
ton of the enterprise let the question where can be deter
Mined by what they or we say but
affirmed that this right by necessity They have
throw them one hundred feet Is to bar
undertaking. Their complaint mas Deeu
would cost more money Of course would 1t would be econ
omy for them condemn roadbed and use our rails
Judge Wlard-When this before me on the motion
for an Injunction many these quesonswere considered and
It seemed to that bill in equity would reach the point
the difficulty The thought then occurred TO me- suppose
should become necessary apply some reasonable rule IN
determining of location and should arrive a the
combustion that the Columbia and Augusta Railroad Company
had d.prted from and convenient route attracted by
facilities existing certain point for instance depot or
local created another road be
the proper action Court of Equity to take? My concu
on was that that view could be covered decree in equity
and it now strikes would still be the proper remedy
Mr. ConneThat hereafter IN the dlscuson as TO
the of the remedy But the point Whlch your
Ionor regards essential has never Deen ed ana
we carry the prohibition here never can be tried
That is the very object of these proceedings What is an
snnea WORTH There only eight miles to be completed
An has been made that equity cases shall not be
tried until June Do know that this case Will be tired then
There NAV be pleas to be heard and issues to be
before the merits of the main question reached
he carried to the December of the Supreme Court
then road will be built and there never has been
in the history udcaturo instance OF Court rendering
decision which would dvest property OF the immense value
had under such circumstances acquired Your Honors wou
come the conclusion the enterprise being completed ha 10
rair the evil would work evil of greater magnitude than
existed The question would be decided outside OF
law tribunals and would shrink from Judgment that
might involve 30 much Of retrogression =
Judge Wlard-Wby could not as well grant an injunction
then nowp
may please your Honor pure apstract
right is very rarely administered
Judge Wlard-But must that the events OF the
next months will not prevent this Court from rendering
inst decision