Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1875-03-09
HARPER,S FERRY.


public property at Hsrper's Ferry. We called
attention to the fact that decree had been
obtained, as early as September, 1878, to re-
sell the property and to the concession upon
the part of District Attorney GOf, that there
existed no,o no legal obstacle to the enforce
npent of that decree by resale at once. The
reason assigned by the Attorney General of
the United States for deferring the resale,
was the existence of clond upon the title to
the property purchased by F. G. Adams &
Co, springiug out of a claim set up by the
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Co. to certain
ground actually occupied by their track, on
the margin of the Potomac, and right of
way over certain other ground included In the
purchase. To remove this cloud, the Gov
eminent of the United States have Joined
with Adams & Co. in a chancery suit in the
District Court of the United States for West
Virginia. at Wheeling, against the Baltimore
aud Ohio Railroad Co. The Attorney Cen
eral proposes to wait until the latter suit is
decided, before he directs a resale of the
property, upon the ground that to sell with
cloud resting upon the title would involve a
sacrifice to the Government This is the
reason for delay interposed by the Attorney
General, and, as indicated in our last issue,
We propose to discuss the propriety of his de-
cision in this matter.
The first question to be considered is, the
probable duration of this delay. We reply at
once, that the probabilities are that final de-
cision of the last mentioned suit will not be
reached for at least flee gears. 1t may ex>
tend through ten years of litigation. The
suit was instituted in 1873; thus far the
Railroad Company have not answered the
bill, which stands upon demurrer Ac-
cording to the report of General Goff, who is
connected with the suit as United States At
tOrney for this district, the demurrer will
come up for argument in SepteC Der, 1875
We have not seen the bill of complaint, and
consequently can not venture on pronounced
opinion but We predict that the demurrer
will be sustained, and for the following reasons
The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company
brought suit against Adams & Co. in the
Circuit Court of Jefferson, to establish the
very rights, which, in the United States
Court, are now assailed. In that suit, the
decree was against Adams & Co., after they
had appeared, aud answered, and fully sub,
mitted to the Jurisdiction. From this de-
cree, they have never appealed, and they are
effec:ually estopped from lftigating the same
questions in a different form. If therefore
fha in
-reedf6 in this Jefferson County suir, Cor ex>
hibits any part of 1t without exhibiting the
whole), it is bad on demurrer, and the de-
murrer will be sustained. If the bill makes
no allusion to tie suit in Jefferson, the estop-
pei can be put in by plea, and will be effectual
as tn Adams & Co.
We think it entirely safe to say. therefore,
that the merits of the controversy (Which we
think has been uDwisely inaugurated), be-
tween the United States and the Railroad,
can not be reached under the present BILL
1t may Of course be amended, but such amend
ment will entail delay of another twelve
months. The merits must be tried on depo-
sitions, and these, in their taking, will neces.
sarily consume time. When the District
Judge has decided the case, an appeal will be
taken to the Supreme Court; and heretofore
from the docketing of cause in that Court
until its trial, three years have generally
elapsed
Upon the whole, therefore, we express the
confident opinion that the Harper's Ferry
property will not, under the decision of the
Attorney General, be sold for five years longer
possibly not for ten years!
If this is true. the question recurs, why
should this cruel and oppressive delay be en-
tailed upon the people of Harper's Ferry2
Let it be remembered, that the same cloud.
Of any there be-. upon the title, existed
when the property was sold in 1869. Adams
& Co. bought with full notice, because occu>
pancy as al'0Gys notice to the ertent of title.
Thetruth is, they bought upon the strength
of this occupancy, and for the purpose Of
speeulating upon, by ousting, or re>selliDg to,
or compromising with, the occupant. The
United States carefully avoided any warranty
whatever, and sold only, call its right, and
title to the property" This is distinctly set
forth in the only contract between the vendor,
and Adams & Co. Therefore, in the language
of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate,
we may truly say, that Adams .shas no
equity" to delay a sale. And why, (inde-
feHdeHtIy Of adams d Coz, the United
States should desire to revoke the right of
way, or destroy the tenure of the Baltimore
and Ohio Railroad Company, is to the COM
mon mind, absolutely iucomprehensible. If
the Railroad has enjoyed certain privileges
for forty wears, las is conceded). whv should