The daily state chronicle. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 188?-1891, 1890-05-04

The Case Before Judge Womack at
OxfOrd--.and Relegated tor a Jury
Trial.
The town of Durham, some days ago,
obtained an order from Judge McRae
restraining the Oxford X Clarksville
railroad company from entering or
trespassing upon Peabody street, or
constructing railroad upon said
street.
On the same day the Oxford 4 Clarks-
vile railroad company obtained from
Judge Armfield restraining order, en-
Joining the Durham X Northern rail
way company from constructing road
for short distance along Peabody
street to connect the broken ends of its
line, the break having been made by
the Oxford a Clarksville forces, by tear
ing up short distance Of the same.
1t will be remembered from the
cases heard here some time ago that
both the above roads claim Peabody
street rs their right of way-the O q
C's. claim being that.the street is iuc!ud
| ed in the original condemnation by the
n. G.. r. R., of which the .. IL e.. is a
part, under the control of the Rich mond
Il Danvlle company. The d. & Ms
claim is that the street is controlled by
the town of Durham. and that the grant
of the right of way to that road from
the town was valid The town of Dur
ham has been defending its right to dis
pose of the street and has therefore de-
Tended it's action in granting the right
of way to the Durham Il Northern road.
The ipjunctions spoken of above were
the result of the fight, and they came uE
before Judge Womack, at Oxford last
Thursday The argument lasted some
time, and yesterday the judge rendered
his decision which is in substance as fol
lows.
'In this case it appears that the Oxford
& Clarksville railroad company is not il
possession of the land upon which th'
trespasses are threatened, which are tn,
building, &C., by the D. d N. of rail.
road 145 feet long, SO as to connect th'
line of it's road on Peabody street witt
its right of way. and the running of it
That the D. & N. and the 0. Il G. eacl
claim title and the right of possession
which respective titles and rights O
possession depend upon complicate'
, questions of law, themselves dependen
upon undecided and conflicting ques
: tions of fact. That by continuance Q
3 the restraining order heretofore grant
ed, the Durham & Northern railroa
company will be prevented from usin
and operating the line of railroad frol
= the electric light house to Dukes fax
D tory. That by restraining orders an
: inlunctions heretofore granted
: other actions, the o. Il G. is prohibite
,, from operating the said line of raj
$ road. That the public will be deprive
of the advantages of said railroad unit
the hearing of said several action
should this restraining order be conti1
ued. That the town of Durham und'
h claim of right for the supposed adva1
tages which would accrue to the peop
by having a competing line Of railros
to the business portion OF its tow
q granted the right TO the D. Il N. to ere
If and operate said road. That any injul
h to the defendant will be largely due
D. the results of competition between Il
le conflicting railroads. With this $ a
le facts existing, the court will not pa
le upon the conflicting claims of the pa
a ties to this action, but will relega
them to the forum of a ju
trial, and will not restra
the operation Of railroad in which t
people may be so vitality interestei IN
jury shall have passed upon the CO
s. troverted issues, but permit the pub
Id to be served by both railroads until the
or is an adjudication of the matters in &C
troversy, and will leave the 0. & G.
'' its remedy in damages against the D.
It, N. to which it is admitted to be able
IS respond" :,
The Oxford & Clarksville railro
>, company was represented by F. H. B,
OF bee, ESQ. the town of Durham, and
re Durham e. Northern railway compa
IT, by Col. J. W. Hinsdale and Messrs.
at w. Fuller, J. S. Manning and 20
Devereux, Jr.