Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1880-03-30
COMMUNICATED.
BERaYv111E March e5.1sso

Il
s. V.'R upon my own and law partners
land, was duly received. have seen the
article of the Spirit of Je6erson upon the
subject. When it charactorizes our act as
evident" and Outrageous" it does us great
injustice. am not only willing but an ;ous
that the public should be placed in the pos.
session of the facts, and have no fears in that
event'of our action being justified by every
impartial mind.
The facts, briefly. are these We pur.
chased the land in 1876, under an order of
sale bad at the suit of the lien creditors of
X. w. Briggs; deceased. Nearly the whole
OF our purchase money was paid in satisfac,
ton of deed of trust executed and recorded
in about 1853. the residue was raid upon
judgments had before the war. and regularly
dOcketed in or before 1867. Under the ordor
of the Court in this suit, the purchase money
was applied to the payment of these liens,
the land was surveyed to US, including the
railroad bed, and we were put into the pos.
session of the land under the Courts order
Under a purchase from R. w Briggs al
legged to have been in the latter part of the
year 1871, or spring of 1879, either about
the time Of the institution of this suit or
during its tendency, the Railroad Company
entered upon the land in the year 1872 and
graded their road bed over it. Thoy have
the grading in 1872, entered upon said land
by any officer or agent, until their entry for
track laying less than one year ago. If any
such entry has been made since our posses
sion. before the entry for track laying, it was
made without the knowledge of our tenant,
whose evidence has been taken in our suit
against the company. IF made during Briggs
possession il was without the knowledge of
two of his brothers. one of whom was 10 the
habit of assisting him in his farming opera,
tions, both living close to him and both of
whose dispositions have been taken in the
Gauss.
The contract under which the Company
claims is alleged to have been in writing
In the answer of the Company, in the hand
writing of Vice President Boyce, fled in
Adopt May 1879. it is said that it is probably
amongst the papers which were in the Gus.
sOdy Of its former secretary, Ashby. In the
deposition of Vice President Boyce it is said
to have been burnt in the SadIer Building,
IN Charlestown, in August 1879. The depo-
sition was taken in October or November
| 1919 This contract was never put on record,
and is, of course, void as to Briggs cred
itors. The terms Of it are that Briggs was
to receive 81 300 or depo, to be built upon
his land The deposition of the Vice Pres.
Ident, Boyce, is to the effect that by tho
terms of the last contract it was optional with
the Company whether to build the depot or
pay the money, optional where upon the
Briggs land it should be located, optional as
to tho size, material or cost of it but when
buih upon Briggs land it was to be the prop
erty of the Company and no, Briggs This
is the character of the contract as disclosed
| by the only deposition in the record which
proves it, that of the Vice President.
These are the respective titles of the par
ties contestant. When in 1879 we learned
that 1t was the purpose of the Company to
enter upon our land for the purpose Of track
laying, We notified Mr.. Boyce tina. we OBJ
Jected to such eutry until there was some
satisfactory arrangement made as to the land
damages. He then claimed that we were
entitled to none, and set up the Briggs con-
tract, aud in any event that We were not
entitled to the damages, but that il damages
were to be paid they should 90 to Briggs
| creditors, and not to US. We then proposed
in settlement Of all questions that the amount
OF damages should be either assessed by COM
mIssioners or arbitrators, paid into Court, aud
let the Court determine all questions pect>
ing them-between the Company the credit
ors and ourselves. This proposition was
declined. We were given TO understand
that the Company would stand upon its con-
tract, and then We instituted our injunction
suit. The allegations of our bill were few
and simple, viz: that we had purchased thi.
land from the Court; that VIC had been put
in possession of it by the Court in 1876, and
had been IN possession of it ever since, using
| it in all particulars as our cwp and that now
the Shenandoah Valley Railroad Company
| we're about to commit a trespass upon US by
an entry for the purpose of laying their
track. Upon these allegations we prayed the
| Court to determine that we were tho true
owners and in possession, and to enjpiu the
entry. Judge Turner, of our Circuit Court
granted the injunction. Shortly after it was
| granted the cause was heard again in vaca-
ton upon motion by the Company to dis
solve and upon affidavits. The Court dis.
solved the injunction. We then took deposi>
tons regularly in tho cause, and moved
before Judge Turner to have the injunction
reinstated. Our motion denied, and We
appealed in form 10 the Supreme Cour. Of
Appeals of our State. The action Of the Ap.
peila,e Court. or OF Judge Staples, to whom
the petition for appeal was presented, was to
reinstate the original order of injunction
awarded by Judge Turner upon tho same
terms as to bond, 60. We executed new
Injunction bond. had certified copy of the
eDJoiniog order. together with a certificate
that the required bond had been executed,
served upon the Company on the Tednes,
day morning, the next day after the order
had been received. Mr.. Travers, the attor-
ney of the Company, as we'll as Vice, Presi>
dent Boyce. were also notified certainly on
Thursday-1 think also on Wednesday,
that such an order was in existence. Mr..
Boyce was served with a certified copy of it,
Notwithstanding all of these notifications the
Company, in defiance of the order of the
State, speaking through one of the Judges
of its highest Court, and in contempt of it.
continued to do what the order said it should
not do, and run its trains over the forbidden
tract on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday,