Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1889-10-04
BELT-LINE TROUBLES
ANlNJUNcTloN GRANTED YESTERDAY
BY JUDGE WELLFORD.
The Fredericksburg Railroad Company
Restrained from Entering Upon DIR.
Pattcrson's Lands.

The Belt Line is confronted By serious troll
be
Judge Wexford has onioined tho Fredericks-
burg company from entering upon the lands OF
DIR. r. a. Patterson.
The decision In effect is That the Freiericks-
burg company hasn't the right to build tho ez-
tension, which, in connection with that being
built on tae south side Of the river by tho Rich
mond eni Petersburg Railroad Company, Ia de-
signed 10 form tho Belt Line"
THE CASE.
In this ease n bill was presented 20 Judge p. r.
Wexford on The 18th oi last month praying m
Injunction prohibiting the Richmond, Frode-
ricsshurg and Potomac Rairoa Com fany from
entering upon and using the ~ - DR.. Il. 4.
Patterson. throuch which IL connecting line with
the Peters burg railroad Is laid on, on the ground
that tho railroad company md 40 right either
under i;s charter or under The general railroad
law OF the state, 20 buiid said conueclng me;
and furthormore u n hal such power Snil CONF
pany cuud not lawfully proceed With ~ Nors
until ihe amount AsPcssef by the c0fnrn s-ioneIs
for tho uso of sai land e2222G was either
paid 20 tho owner OF the .nnd or tlio court
10 tfis bili the railroad company several days
ago illod an answer sworn o. by Major T.. 7. d. Ny
er-, tho general superintendent. admitting ihe
principal allegations. but denying that the
+Outheru terminus was 10 bo changed aud claim
ing she power 10 build this connecting line under
the rigi gwen n tho charter ic build lateral or
branch roads ten uliles IN long'h. and also 10
proceed with Tork before paving the damages
assessed. The Judge granted the injunction on
both the grounds named above and hXod the IT,
junction DOnd a. $500, which was promptly exc
ruied by Dr. Patterson.
The opinion. which was delivered by the judge
oralls and without notes was fuil and able
discus ion Of the powers snd rights Of the COM
pany under IT, charter, granted February. 1874,
which being prior tO the general railroad law VI
lo5l, was an irreyocahle legislative contract.
SYNOPSIS OF OPINION.
The opinion WAS ir substance asfollows:
!. lhl- railroad company. though authorized
10 do -o - ia charter, could not lawfully enicr
upon AMI take private property for IT. own uso
without either raging 10 the Ownor OF into court
the Hmoun' dxed by tho commissioners ns tho
value a. tho iaud Insen: and on this ground
alone the nlInctiOn sh0uld be- awarded
=. That m. chartered rights of thc company ~
% its branching powers must be determined IA
tho Light of he surrounding facts az .he slime tho
charter wa granted.
Al mat time there was no other road entering
this city with which IL could connect aud no ether
such read had hon been chartered.
Tho Legislature. therefore. could not have in
tended, by giving IN" power - nuild lateral or
1rdrrh roads. 20 saucti0n or authorize this road
connecting with the p 'ershurg railroad.
The branch roads ab'hOrizrd by tho Leglsla-
ture in granting this charter were for entirely
different purposes. and wcro we'll defined by no
late Potter v Daniel. counsel for This road, In his
brief before the Court Of 4 ,peals N the cas0 Of
the Richmond. Frederi-k burg aud Potomac
Railroad Company ~. Tho CITY Of Richmond.
The power to construct branches or lateral
roads given In the seventh clause ~ this charter.
says M Daniel. " manitcstly aud VIGOROUSLY
related only 10 such branches or lateral roads IN
connection with she said railroad at points along
the linc jctrccn and not az It's termini. ~ should
be from time 10 time found by experience 10 bo
essential or kn pOriant ~ feeders To the trade
and travel over its principal line u railroad, and
give 10 tho undevelOped resources IN me country
tfar>rsad BIZ IL access 10 f. Tho initial point-the
extreme southern terminus-fr0m which THIS
railroad WIS by its charter 10 De made was caro-
fully established and fixed by tho L@gislature.'
Tho proposed road complained Of In the bill can
moi be called brGHch r0ad IN any proper ensc. 10
T. called a connecting road bOtn In The res0-
luton OF The stockholders and OF the Board Oi Di-
rertors, passed In November, 1888, and January,
1853, under which 10 has been laid out and work
ed "a meeting u tho stockholders was held IN
Baltimore on the 2ith uiimo. SINCE this bill was
presented for injunction, n which resolution
was adopted ratfying al that hal been done ia
the premises, aud In this resolution u.is ROAD i5
styled " The James-RiYcr branch" Whethor
this will cure the defect ia the original reSolu-
tions was not stated by the Juieol II is also
admitted ia the answer Of tho company. sworn 90
Dy Major My9rs, that the whole end an1 object OF
tho company IN building this road Is 10 :Orm
connection with the Petersburg railroad, au OBJ
Jcct clearly not within the intention Of the ie-
gisi1mre in 1884. Tho object sought % bc q 'com-
pll-ned by tho building OF this road ia proper
one and ought 70 be encouraged. but tho courts
B. Tho general railroad law provides for con-
meeting these two railroads outside ot the city,
hltei nrst applying 10 the Council ior peruii7-
sion TO do so within the city limits; but thisriXht
does not rest unless the c'ty. after proper appi-
cation, refuses 90 give permission 10 connect by
One practical route within die city limits. The
acton % the Council In excluding tho Use OF
steam-euRues on tho come 'iion road along Bel
yidrrc street after Anrl. 1893, was not such re-
fusal as is contemplated by the -taiute, DefBuso
that road beiongs tO q separate company from
the Richmond, Frcdcucksburg aud rot0mnc
Railroad Company. The Council should be no.
titled I'm tho proper way by IN" RchmOudi Fro
derirksOurg anl Potomac Railroad Company
IN AZ unless permission 70 connect within tho
city was gwen tho connection would be effected
outside. The city OF Richmond had right %
this notification, and 10 was unlawful Cor tho
railroad company 20 proceed with this connect
ing road under tue general railroad law Without
first pursuing the course prescribed Nv statute
tho policy Of tho Legislature fifty years ago
when this charter vas granted was 10 grant
charters only from city 70 city. in order 10 have
the freight and passengers trausferrs through
thc cities by other modes of conveyance ana
thereby build and benefit tho cities au1
towns OF the state Tho statute allowing two
roads term mating in the same city 10 connect, ~
sinfed, was passed In 1855 shortly after the case
OF the baltimore and ohio railroad Company
rs. City of Wheeling Was decided, ana doubt
less was in consequence Of mat decision.
lu every Wow OF THIS case the injunction pray
Ell for should Do awarded.
WHAT now?
Tho next stop OF the Fredericssburg Railroad
Company Will probably be 10 tako fcposiIons
20 show thai the damage 10 DR.. Patterson Is not
irrepRrable.
They hold that IN this instance tho Doctor Is
not entitled % an Injunction unless the oct COM
rlalned of Is unlawful and the consequences
irreparable.
Judge Wexford IA emphatic enough as to tho
former. but the company think u worry lkoly
that they can remove his impression as to tho
opens next week thoY will make motion % dis
solve the Injunction.
II that IA refused. then they arc AZ liberty to
take IA appeal
THE ASSESSMENTS.
II seems from the remarks made In court yea
terlay hat except in one case no money has
been paid for tho lands condemned for the route
OF tho Belt Line. The reason, however, IS that
ne reports Of the commissioners are being ap-
peaicd from. generally by ths landowner; bI'
sometimes by tho company, anu sometimes by
both.
these cases aro pending in the County Court,
Hon. l.. C. Minor. Judge. snd whom last called
were continued thirty days 10 await Judge Well
ford 3 decision.
DR.. PATTERSON.
Tho complainant IN this important case is DR..
T. 4. Patterson, Z. wealthy tODaccOnlst doing
business here but residing ia HenricO about Two
miles from tho corporate Limits. and whose
beautiful farm Uhe place Of his resdence) ex-
touds from the Westham fCary-StreeO road 10
the Grove road. The route Of tho Belt Line Is
across the eastern portion OF his ground ana
from road 10 road.
Ihe proceedings In this case are IN the Henrco
Circuit Court, out as that tribunal Il now in VA
L. Of 4ll -