Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1875-11-19
THE RAILROAD SUIT.
CITY COUNCIL VS.. A. & W. R. R.
Decision in favor Of the
City.
OPINION OF JUDGE KEITH.


ton Railroad Company VS.. the City Council Of
Alexandria ct al, Injunction to restrain the
City Council from tearing up aud removing the
track on St. Asaph street, between Princess
aud King streets, which was argued on Tues
day last by Messrs II. D. CIaughton and David
l.. Smoot, aud Charles +. Stuart for the city,
aod S. T. Beach for the company, aud cub
mitled for decision upon the merits, Judge
James Keith delivered the following opinion
to-day -
The Alexandria and Washington Railroad
Company VS.. The City Council OF Alexandria
and ais.
The object OF this suit is to restrain the off,
GERS IF the city Of Alexandria 10 the execution
OF an ordinance OF the City Council directing
the railroad track OF the plaintiff to be torn up
from Process street to kl0g street, in said
city, unless the same should be voluntarily re-
moved within thirty days from the dat, of said
ordnance
The plaintiff AYERS that it is a corporation
duly organized under an act of the Virginia
Legislature, passed 10 the year 1854, for the
purpose OF constructing and operating rail
road from the city OF Alexandria to the city of
the road was constructed, and by aud with the
consent of the city Of Alexandria, passed in
1856, 1t catered the limits OF said city, coming
south as far as Princess street. This ordinance
Was coupled with certain conditions, which It
appears have never been complied with by the
plaintiff. BY another ordinance passed short
time afterwards, the plaintiff was permitted to
come about a half square further south ia the
direction OF King street.
1t also appears that about the beginning of
the year 1862 the plaintiff being, from some
cause, embarrassed, proceedings were taken by
certain parties to sell the road under deed Of
trust, which the plaintiff had Heretofore made,
and at the sale certain parties who became the
purchasers assumed to themselves the name
and style OF the Washington, Alexandria and
Georg, town railroad, aud claimed 10 own and
ID eXelclsc, by virtue OF the statute la such
case made and provided, all the franchises,
rights, and privileges heretofore appertaiung
to the Alexandria and Washington railroad
ln February, 1868, the Legislature Of Vr-
glnla, then 10 session at AlxAniria, under the
authority OF the restored government, passed
az act, at the Instance OF the so-called Wash
ington, Alexandria, and Georgetown Railroad
Company, in which said act reference is made
to the sale under the deed Of trust of the Alex
andria and Washington Railroad, and the said
sale Was declared to be to all intents and Dur
poses valid and binding one. This, and only
this, is the sole scope aud purpose of the act
of L bluary, 1863
ln January, 1864, the WASHINGTON, Alexan-
dria, and Georgetown Railroad Company again
appear before the Legislature seeking az ex-
tension of their privileges, and as though some
doubt were even then felt as to the character
OF the title by which it assumed to exercise
corporate franchises and privileges, the Lsgis-
lature was called upon again to give the assur-
ance that it was without doubt body corpo.
rete, and to render assurance douby sure it
might proceed at once to Increase its stock
and double its debts
ln the meantime this corporation was then
10 possession of and for years continued to en-
JOY the road of the plaintiff from Princess street.
10 tae city OF Alexandra, to Washington, and
OF all the other property rights anG franchises
OF the plaintiff. During this period the city of
alexandria, by one or more ordinances, per-
United the Washington, Alexandria, and
Georgetown Railroad Company to lay its track
along St Asaph street, from Princess (its orr
gna termlaus) to King street, distance of
three squares The plaintiff having soon after
the termination of the war brought suit 10 the
Washington, Alexandria, aud Georgetown
Railroad Company for the recovery of its prop
erty, such proceedings were had that, in De-
cemoer. 1867, decree was entered declaring
the sale by the substituted trustee of the Alex
aDdrla and Washington railroad void and the
incorporation of the Washington, Alexandria,
and Georgetown Railroad Company under said
sale nulllty. (l9 Grafton, $751; From this
decree an appeal was taken, and at January
term, 1870 of the Court of Appeals the decree
OF the Circuit Court Was affirmed, the Court of
Appeals going even further than the Circuit
Court, tor Judge Wioughby, delivering the
opinion OF the court, considers the effect of the
act OF February, 1868, purportng to validate
SAID sale, and declares that it was 10 plain vio-
latloD OF the constitution, In that it was an
assumption of judicial power by the LegsIa-
ture, and therefore void. 1t is to be regretted
that the effect Of the act of 1864 was not also
brought 10 question, as a decision on that point
would have put at rest all doubts which may
now exist IN the minds of some as to the exist
ence of the Washington, Alexandria, and
Georgetown Railroad Company by virtue of
that act. BY the decision, then, of the highest
court OF this Commonwealth, the plaintiff was
relnsiated 10 the posses sion of all which had
been wrongtully taken from it that is of the
railroad track from Princess street to Wash
lngton. its other property, and the right to use
and operate the same.
Having been thus clothed anew with its
char cred rights the plaintiff acquired Of the
Washington, Alexandria and GEORGETOWN Com.
pany the track which 1t had laid as above meu-
toned, from Princess street to King, and went
on to use the same as the Washington, Alex.
andr!a and Georgetown Railroad Company had
done; and while this use Of the track in dis
pute was permitted by the city, cannot fod
any ordinance such as the bill of com
plalnant refers to, ratifying and con
6ruing to the Alexandria and Wash
ington Railroad the privileges conferred upon
the other Company. On the contrary, iu the
facts agreed, it is stated that the City Coun
Gil has never 10 any form authorized the Alex
andrla and Washington Railroad Company to
use st. Asaph street, between Princess and
King streets; and has never directly or Indirect
ly recognized or ratified any transfer arrange
ment, or contract made by or between the AL
ey.nSria apI WoS r ailro.d No,n,n-