Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1873-01-15

| SOOu idltIl SuUSCTlUcuJ VI dV ltstSt Nv GuOuS-
and dollars per mile from the beginning
point of the contemplated road, to the
point along the line where it intersects
with an eristiRg railroad in actual opera
ton, or navigable stream, or its ternai-
nus" Subsection also speaks of the
contemplated terminus" ~
! This statement, required to be filed, is
an essential. The decree should contain
"a description of the line of the road" sits
general route" tand should fix the "ter-
mini"-the beginning and the terminus.
| Otherwise how can the court know wheth-
er or not five thousand dollars per mile
have been subscribed?
| The route of the road as set forth in the
petition is as follows: commencing in
Anderson county, Tennessee, at a point on
the mountain Fork of Poplar Creek near
DunnavOn's Gap, running along the val
| ley near the base of Walden's Ridge, so
as to connect with any Railroad or Rail-
roads now constructed or hereafter con-
structed, or with any navigable stream,
within thirty miles of said Gap, and on
either or both sides thereof" Conceding
for the sake of argument, that the Begin
ming point is sufficiently definite, it can
hardly be insisted that the general route
and terminus or termiui are. Is the road
to run east or west, north or south? What
railroad is it to connect with? With what
navigable streams? lOr is .Dunnavon's
Gap pivot, from which the road may
swing in any direction which may be
chosen? Ifso, can it be said that the gen
eral route is described? l think most
clearly not; and L therefore hold that the
Statement" is defective.
3d. Can this court, in addition to the
power to build the principal road, clothe
this corporation with the power to build
branch roads, in general and indefinite
terms, in the original decree? l think not.
In subsection Is of Sec. Is provision is
made for the building of branch roads, for
a change of location of the road, &C., &c,
which shall be done by new decree of
the Chancery Court under a new petition,
approving or ratifying said proposed chan
ges and alterations, &C., &c. This evident
ly contemplates important and leading
branches, constituting new enterprises.
But that such Il corporation would have
the right, without any express provision
in the decree, as an incident to the profita-
BILE exercise of its corporate privileges, to
build such short branches in the
immediate neighborhood of the road,
as might enable it TO reach a
mine, or quarry, or factory, or forge,
for the convenient use of such mine, or
forge or factory in loading and unloading
and in conveying the products of such
mine, or forge or factory to the main road,
is reasonably clear to my mind. If these
branches are necessary for the main object
and purpose of the road, without which it
could not be profitably used, then the cor
poration would have the right to build
them. But if they are of the character of
independent undertakings and are not
necessary to the main road, no such right
would exist.
Ah. Can this court empower petitioners
to build railroad, (Which seems to be their
main purpose and in the same decree en-
power them to engage i'll mining, manu-
featuring and trading, and to erect FORCES,
furnaces. mills, manufactures, &c, &C.?
The application in this case is for all these
privileges.
Sec. LIST of the act of 1871 provides for
the granting of charters generally, without
defining their special object. Sec Cd points
out the mode of obtaining charters for
building macadamized, graded turnpikes
and plank roads. Sec. 6 points out the
mode of having the inhabitants of any
town or village incorporated. And Sec.
Is, with sections, relates to the incOr-
pOration of companies g for the construct
ing and building of railroads. a
In the statute these different kinds of
corporations are treated differently, and
distinct provisions are enacted as to the
formation OF each. 1t was evidently the
intention of the Legislature that by vir.
tue Of a single petition, no one set of men
should be clothed with the powers of all
these different kinds of corporations, in
volving different duties and requiring the
exercise of totally different powers. TO
authorize railroad corporations to engage
in miniog, leasing, manufacturing and
trading would be unusual, unsafe and con-
trary to public policy, and I think is con-
trary to the spirit of the statute.