The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-03-17
The South Carolina Railroad Company
and the columbia and Augusta Rail-
road Company.

As tho questions at issue between the South
Carolina Railroad Company and the Columbia
and Augusta Railroad Company have bccn very
generally misunderstood. The South Carolina
Railroad Company, with view TO the full and
proper presentation Of both sides of the con-
troversy, retained skilful stenoerapber to at
tend the session of the Supreme Court in Co.
Iumbia, at the argument of the prohibition
case, in which all the issues between the two
companies wore, by the nature of the proceed
ing, brou. bit up tor the decision Of the court.
The arguments Of the counsel for the South
Carolna Railroad Company, and those OF the
counsel of the Columbia and Augusta Railroad
Company, are alike presented to our readers
in the supplement We issue to-day.
Without entering into any commentary upon
the merits of the many questions raised in
the argument, two points appear to us worthy
OF consideration:
1st. That the South Carolina Railroad Com
papy do not contest the right Of the Columbia
and Augusta Railroad Company to construct
their road, bat simply their right to construct
it upon the land Of the South Carolina Railroad
Company.
I'd. That the question Of right between the
two companies has never received judicial de-
termination.
That the Columbia and Augusta Railroad
Company have appropriated to their use lands
which belong 10 the South Carolina Rail- load
Company is undoubted, for it ID not denied.
Their right to do 30 Is the main issue, and upon
that the courts have hitherto been curiously
silent. 30 far as the companies themselves are
concerned the matters OF issue between them
may be safely left to the guidance of the coun-
sci sflearned in the law" who represent tho re-
spective companies. But outside OF these
companies and their interests, the question is
Of grave Importance to the community ut
large. Can corporation take land, build
upon and enjoy it without any Legislative
grant OF any judicial decision authorizing the
appropriation =?
1t would be reproach to the Jurisprudence
of any civilized country il the rights of pro-
perty rested upon tenure 50 insecure. In
whose favor the right may ultim- be de-
termined, the community are net perhaps very
deeply interested; but that the right should be
determined, that the principle should be fully
and trmly established that the citizen can
not be deprived Of his property except by due
process Of law, is OF the highest importance,
aud in that view We call attention to tho present
controversy, iu which, as the papors show, the
South Carolina Railroad Company has been
deprived of it's property, and Is now despoiled
of it, without any competent legal authority
having decided that the Columbia and Augusta
Railroad Company had the right to take it.
reference to tho arguments will show that
all the questions have been most X ,eDly and
zcalously dis ,us ed. 1t is duo, however, to
tho South Carolina Railroad Company to say
that they ondeavored to avoid the protractcd
liti.at by tho proposition 10 refer a!l the
matter in disp to to board of arbitration.
composed OF three members from cash road.
Had this proposition been accepted and carried
out in good faith by the Columbia and Augusta
Rillrold, this lengthy and expensive litigation
might have been avoided. 1t is not too late,
we trust, for wiser counsels to influence the
Columbia and Augusta Railro Dad Company, and
prompt speedy and equitable adjustment of
the dispute.