The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1866-1891, 1869-02-27
ARGUMENT OF Ex- x-CHANoELLoR CARROLL.

v it please the Court 1t my intention to participate in
this discussion and therefore, prepared present tie cause
due to the Court and myself STILL the of the
argument have received very strong and decided impressions
especially with reference branch Of the cend to this with
your Honors permission will address few observations
THROUGHOUT the argument the has been treated
the question of legal right the part of these defendants had never
been considered and audgd by his Honor Judge Pa 1t has been
assumed on both sides the question which, it averred ought
primarily been considered and to the legal
of defendants proceed under the Act of 1863 in truth
never investigated by Judge P apprehend however, that MS
opnon be fairly construed will be that this assumption utterly
without foundation. E.7S
The REALTORS were served with due notice of the application made to
Judge P by petition have the necessary proceedings instituted
order ascertain the amount of to which the
lima Railroad Company entitled for the appropriation OF their land
They were opposed to the prayer of the petitioner
ordinary and regular procedure as indicated
Bes g Richardson the party resisting the application
bound his the grounds of his objection and set forth
the upon why the prayer the petitioner should not be
granted The relators conormed and did make formal
the notice served upon em wherein they set forth their
grounds of objection the proposed application Your Honors VIII
much ap6caon multitude of words but after ALL when summed
up, few in number ..a '' Z: -. .-'. -
First general denial of the right of the defendants to enter for
the purpose described specific denial that by act or
authority of the State has power been to the defendants pro
ceed under of 1861 No A. Then follows recital OF the re-
ators title to their land and the allegation that their lands and right
way and exclusive the same and must
necessary for their road Next alleged that the right to hold these
lands and the right Of derived from the Legislature OF the State
and that the charter nvbe under the OF
the United States Then follows the declaration that the powers rights
and privileges granted the Legislature have been confirmed by the
judicial tribunals of the State in the most ample tom and that SAID
powers rights and privileges their nature and by express enactment
purposes of the South Carolina Railroad not
threatened with have actually been encoached and
with by the Columbia and Augusta Railroad Company and 50 the re-
lators proceed. 49, .
Now may it please the Court the different grounds of objection
set forth this be considered will be found after all that
they do not sustain their case.
First thew object that these defendants have right either under
the Act of 1863 under any other law Of the State to enter
upon the land of the o with view appropriation tor the pu
That pon was undoubtedly submitted to Judge P and the specific
ground upon which they relied that the Act Of 1868 had
merely created in the future and did not apply to
corporate bodies already existing 1t considered explicitly and for
maly and by his Honor adjudged against the REALTORS
Then they suggest that according to the terms OF their charter the
of their road distance of hundred feet belongs solely
exclusively the South Carolina Railroad Company and that eonSe
queny that corporation cannot be considered as within the e
Act Of 1863 when refers to those parties whose nds are ao
the REALTORS and declared the South Carolina Railroad Company not
be exempt from the operation of the Act
They further contend that the power question OF
land against the consent of the owner which only be
delegated under right eminent domain and that be granted
effectively it must be in terms or in terms implying nane
application grant call your attention the language OF
Judge P "a formal has been put by the South Carolina
Railroad Company, setting forth their objections thereto and among
others this one w.t. that the entering by the Columbia ana
Augusta Railroad Company upon the lands Ganitevie where the
respondents depot situated for the purpose OF constructing e
road thereon and also its entry upon their lands and right way
between Granteve and Hamburg for like purpose would be
hdrance the and enjoyment the highway for which SAID
lands right of way were previously procured
After hearing argument by counsel thus far ana Oh
law authorities quoted by hem mind has been led TO the oo"g
conclusons:"
That the manifest intention of the General Assembly IN the
passage of said Act No. A. enact law which should be- ap
cable and be obligatory upon all railroad companies in the State
South Carolina whenever the in the construction OF It's oao
claimed the of entering upon and using portion of the lands
and right of way the other The South Carolina Railroad Com
pany made exception the operation OF this enactment
butt on the contrary section eight said Act declares armatve
lands of way which have been heretofore procured
construction of highway shall be considered ex
enlpt any liability condemnation but the right OF way over
the same may condemned for the construction of other
highway" ~
Surely that seems to be sufficiently distinct
The n other round assumed in the answer of the reators that
the proposed appropriation by these defendants of taer land within
one hundred feet of the centre of their road has erated