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

th9
1858 The rights granted were subject rights previously
existing which had been cea defined and the statute
harmony with each other fulfil the objects ofher creation
Take very which your Honor has referred When
tho Court of Errors decided That the and augusta
Railroad Company could the track of the Souh
Railroad near Columbia it ephatcay right OF way by
necessity They compelled to pass over track OF eef
the Greenvle and Coumba South Carolina Raroads Dy
the very terms charter The f&ed and they
could go without crossing one or the oner
of the roads named 1t was absolutely right OF way oy
necessity Yet what did the Court of Errors decareY They
decided that the right be exercised in to
the rights of the elder grant.
Judge Ward-That was said reference to the joint
of the roads.
MIR ConnerThat is all say here except that the user
applies to lands. 80
But have gone little more into this argument than in
tended another branch of the hat
we ask of this tribunal u.s. shall not be despoed OF our
property without adjudication OF the right DO not ask
your Honors judge the right but to see that Inc 10
Take rapid glance the papers and history Of the tga
ton The first paper was petition 70 tnas we nlea
they should be aduged before the property should BE- taken
from u.s. The of complaint is that stand before
this Court deoed of our property @ des pa
that bis similar opinion we thought lneIi1be
from these words of the Tho petioassare entitled
shown why prayer Of the petition should not be
subsequently the 18th Of December we pressed with as
much earnesess consistent with respect that those
words brought up the whole question OF legal put we
were not 30 fortunate be able to carry his with US
in that view of the case To use his own language regarding
myself as the only constituted judicial agent OF the state
under the Act do not deem myself at liberty to enter
tail and decide upon any asserted rights or objections
the simple one hndrance" We pressed upon Judge pa
of two thngsethe to decide the question OF right nm
self or to allow that question be decided before the order
the jury made and had his Honor sad In 50 many
leave the question of right to be determined by the
before whom the equity is tried would not have been
here on this prohibition 1t urged that Judge Patt had
nothing do with the question: but TO- act mlnseray
that however was overued 1t then urged that II could
he propery left to the decision Of the Court OF Equity but
when the case came before the Court of Equity it pressed
upon Judge Boozer with great energy that Judge Pa had
ruled this point and that he had no right to bad
Judge Patt left this question to Judge Booze counsel for
the Other side never could have made the they
did that what Judge att sa but wha ne dd that
was binding on Judge Boozer - sezz3s s.. - ~
Willard granting the injunction, it only gave liberty 70 the
defendants for dissolution Of the injunction on
proof that they have duly acquired the to enter o the
purpose of construction upon the premises claimed BY toe COM
Mr. Conuer-That was tho gist Of Argument We con
tended that "duy acquired meant legally ana !na
where the right was denied could not be legally cqlred
without determining the right 1t was our anxious
desire that between the two tribunals the question OF right
should not be allowedt to fall to the ground.
Judge WlardJudge Patt states in his decision ~ that
after petitioners shall have ascertaned the quan Of compen
saton have paid rendered it. they must necessarily go
back to the Court of Equity nSorder to the Injunction
removed and before they ask its removal must show
not only they have rendered the 6nt that
Injunction order) Their suit in equity pending on the
equity of the Court OF Common Pleas klchand County,
embraces the whole issue to right and every point must
necessarily be adcated upo when they apply tor leave TO
proceed with their road" o
Mr. Conner-Exactly When were before Judge Patt,
was said Judge Boozer will decide the right in the equity
cause when got the equity cause it was SAID TO
Judge Booze you go behind the order for
granted by Judge Pa Hero is the certificate that Inc COM
pensaton has been paid and by the payment the rights ac
quired. ma .l
argument was pressed that the opinion OF Judge Pa had
decided the question of right?
Mr. Memminger-That of che propositions, but the
counsel will be fair enough say that there were many other
arguments used. e..-z
M Conner-Yes but that the of the whole case
and there is where euded judicial decision The curse
of Tantau was on u.s. We had the law all around but could
not bring principle to bear Before Judge Plat was SAID
Judge Boozer will decde before Judge Boozer was said
ude Patt had already decided and between the two stools
the right went May please the Court was remarka
bly, we'll done j.,,
retete that the question Of right has been decided
Anxious as we been the question On It's merits
vet have we had fair hearing of the Before one tr
buna certain part the has been presented before
another tribunal certain other issues have been put
has never vet been tribunal before which all the issues could
receive Just hearing until we reached this Court
The Chief uscef Judge Boozer took the view that the
right had been established it strikes that 1t was OF hnal
character and you could have appealed.
Mr. Conner-How could we2 He simply dissolved the ln-
junction without There was no opinion gwen ana
m we know was that his Honor had filed order to that
effect # .ss- - :,
Now all the proceeding; in the have been printed and
are before THIS Court except that order Judge Booze which
manuscript and where can you lay your niger upon line
in which this question Of right has been adjudged!
Are we not entitled that? We ask no more. Duly &C
CURED was the point upon which laid all the stress posi-
l,,or fhot sunIr rlpht haS