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


ui; tt would he Question of legislative intent; and it
"coud not be presumed hathe Legislature tn e
"power conferred by them should have Su0h dill
were uneouivocaliy expressed !" s.~
=udpe Wifard-What do you hold to be the rule where
charter granted in general terms 10 roa between
two teo;n7 and there definition OF location made? How
could Court determine the propriety of the location?
Mr. Conner-It difficult to the general question In
that way The first answer would naturally be the shortest
line here questions arise with reference to aon
which would necessarily result from as for
ndge Wlard-But on what foundation would you rest the
srprncipte?
Mr. conneron wise application by the Court of Tle the
measure of rights Sic ut anam non ddS Ihe
question of location of detail not dependant on prn
pie but circumstances. =. q
Judge WlardDoes it not depend on reasonable necessity
Take for instance the of the crossing OF these wv"
Columbia That was allowed not because 1t was an aoSoue
but reasonable necessity.
M Conner will take up that argument now Tor 1t suits
me "a we'll as apy other time contend that we have shown
there right of way grant, that whatever power tne
Columbia and Augusta Railroad Company possess expressed
Judge Willard apprehend that will hardly be questioned
that independently of the grant of the charter the eighth sec
ton confrs any right whatever So that after ALL your whole
case is narrowed this point Had you to
the Act of 1863 right this ocation If had the Co.
under authority the of 1863 ard by the there
named And there legal exception to granting the
on they go with the constructions AS in the case
of the crossing Columbia while there no absolute right
conferred by the charte the Court recognized question OF
right dependant upon the necessities of the case
Mr. Conner-We concede the right to build the road under
charter that charter gives to take our land or
the property any corporation That Clear and the con-
claimed by the opposite sde But they do assert
that power ves rights derived from the Act OF
1868 This therefore the issue Have the Legislature given
that power not have they the right give it? We cohcede
that they done so? If it exists it must be declared
express TERMS and there is end to the question
location and simply changing the oeaon take tho
case entirely of the eighth section that after ALL the
right Columbia and Augusta Railroad Company under
the charter seek suitable route somewhere lies at the
bottom of this case.
Mr. Conner-The right exrcse their chartered power to
fulhe objects Of their creation concede but when they
destroy previously existing rights they must show
either that Legislature has expressly authorized them to
do So or tat absolutely necessary The Act contains
no such authorization They must therefore, prove the neces
sty that they either condemn tins property vested
in the South Carolina Railroad Company be ccludcd from
carving out the objects which they chartered
Just that have been anxious to make our The
point suggested by Honor the issue we have en-
to throughout the controversy because is
issue of ac-an be determined by survey Their
of necessity that unless they can over our one
nae their enterprise will fail Now we all of
familiar with that country We know that there no
mountain range no swamp no oostace uneret H. on @ az
its construction if be alleged that to throw this corpora
tion the present line is to prevent the compile
ton enterprise let the question where 1T can be deter
mined not by what they say by ul engineers
who identified with either company But they nave
never affirmed that this was right by necessity Ihey nave
declared throw them off hundred feet to
their undertaking. Their complaint has been simply that 1t
would money Of course it would 1t would be econ
nrnD
Judge WardWhen this was before me on the motion
for an Injunction many of these questions were considered ana
# seemed to me that bill in equity would reach the point OF
the difficulty The thought then occurred to me- suppose II
hpd become necessary apply reasonable rule in
determining the question of location and should at the
cnnoInsion that the Columbia and Augusta Railroad Company
had natural and route by
facilities existing certain point for instance depo or
other local by another road what would be
the proper action Court of Equity to Ny concu
sion that that could be covered by decree in
and now strikes me would still be the proper remedy
Mr. Conner-That Hereafter in the discussion as TO
the of the remedy nt the point which your
Honor essential has never been tled and
unless we carry the prohibition here never can be tried
That the very object of these proceedings What an
aunea worth? There only eight miles to be completed
An has been made that equity shall not be
tried until Do know that this case will be tl1ed then
There may be pleas to be heard and issues to be
decided before the merits of the main question reached
Admitting that reached at that June term will no. the
case he carried to December term of the Supreme Court
What then The road will be built and there has been
in the history dicaure instance OF Court rendering
decision which would dves property OF the immense value 1t
had under such acquired Your Honors would
to- the conclusion enterprise being completed that to
ranar the evil would work evil of greater magnitude than
originally existed The question would be decided outside OF
law tribunals Courts would shrink from Judgment that
might involve so much of retrogresson.
Judge Ward-Why could not as well grant an injunction
then now I?
Mr. may please your Honor pure abstract
right is very rarely administered
Judge Wiard-But must that the events OF the
ne1tine months will prevent this Court from rendering