Virginia free press. (Charlestown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1832-1916, 1870-12-03
Circuit Court.

The Circuit CotTt Of Jefferson County Says
the vaRey Star, 29thl is'stilliu session, Hon.
Z. B. Hall presiding. A large amount OF b'isi-
ness has been transacted during the term.
The case of the Baltimore aad Ohio Railroad
Company VS.. the Harper's Ferry Water Power
and Manufacturing Company was set for hear
ing on Friday and Saturday of last Veek.-
Upon the application Of the counsel engaged
in the cause. the Judge consented to hear the
case argued at Martnsburg II. II. Blackburn,
ESD. the Attdraet for The Railroad Co., fled q
bill in chancery, in August last enjoining and
restraining the defendant from interfering in
sny manner with the said road bed, bridges,
wor..s. SC. Of the Baltimore and Ohio Co., "
ing West of the iron bridge across the Potomac
river ut uArpers Ferry. The defendant filed
an answer and cross bill in which they allege
that the Railroad Company has no right nor
title to the premises in dispute, and claim an
exclusive ownership in themselves, and there
fore pray the court to grant them an injunction
| 10 restrain the Railroad Co., from using the
present track, and from occupying in any way
the premises now in the possession Of tie said
Railroad Co, and as included, as they claim,
| or is known as the Armory property at tlar-
! pcr's Ferry, recently purchased by the said de-
PENDANTS from the United States government.
The Railroad Company recites in their Bill,
a contract between the Company, and the Go
vernment of the United States, executed by j..
r. Poinsett. the then Secretary Of War, and
| Lewis McLane, President of the K. L. Co.
This contract was executed in Nov. 1888 and
grants 10 the Railroad Co., the right of way
over the premises in question, since which time
the Company claims to have been in full pos
Of the same. The Rlilroad Co., further claim
that part of the premises occupied 10y the
bed of the Road and now claimed by the said
defendants is now and has ever been a part of
the territory of the State OF Maryland, and
they exhibit patent from that State to one
Byrus and deed from Byrns to the Co., for
the premises so occupied by them. They also
exhibit a deed from said Byrns to the Govern
ment of the United States conveying certain
parts Of the premises in dispute to the Govern
meut of the United States This deed was
executed subsequent to the deed from Byrus 10
the Railroad Company and it excerpts and re-
serves tie rights before that time conveyed by
said Byrus to said Company. The defendants
in their answer and Cross bill deny that the
grant Of the Secretary Of War is Of any vail
dity, and they deny also that any part Of the
premises occupied by the Railroad Company is
within the territory of the State of Maryland
and they deny that the Railroad Company has
constructed the bed of the road only on pre-
misses described in the poinsett contract. The
| defendants moved the Court to dissolve the IN
junction heretofore awarded to the PajL-
tifis, and to grant them an injunction
epioiuiug tie Railroad Company from
using the preSel. track The Railroad Compa-
ny thereupon applied 10 the court for an order
of survey of the premises, anu lis Iioaor Judge
Hall after full argument refused to dissolve the
injunction or te euion plaintiffs. but ordered a
survey to lie made of the premises in dispute,
aud appointed Benjamau II. Latrobe of BAIti-
mere and S. Howell Brown of jefferson County,
20 make said survey aud report their proceed
iugs with necessary plats to the court The
Railroad Co, was represented by Hon. J. H..
/ u I,trcl,o nc Raltirnrn IIon & II 90 of
Clarksburg, aud II. II. Blackburn, Esq, The
Defendants by Gen. n. p. Banks, of Boston,
and Andrew Hunter, Esq, of Charcstown.
The distinguished counsel engaged in this
case drew together quite a number Of Specta-
tors at the Court House Gen. Banks is fla
cnt anu forciblc speaker but we Judge his forte
is on the hastings and not among the dry de-
tails Of the law,