The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1894-04-12
THELEGAl BATTLENOW.
Tho Forty Company's Attorneys
Filed an Answor
TO APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTION
Made by tho Wheeling & Belmont
bridge Compnny-A Number Of In.
tercsting Points Covered In tho An.
swcr-Tho Case will DO Argued lie.
iOTe Judge PAUL. To.dny-Intcrcst
IN tho Decision.

Yesterday Mcssrs. W. II. IIearne and
J. d. sommcrvillc, attorneys for tho
Wheeling Island Ferry & Packet Com
pany, filed their answer to the applica.
tion OF tho Wheeling & Belmont Bridge
Company for an injunction to prevent
the running OF tho Islanders ferry boat
Charleston. A copy OF tho answer was
sent to the bridge company's attorneys.
Mcssrs. Henry NJ. Russell and A. J..
Clarke. Tho argument on tho applica-
ton for an injunction comes up before
Judge PAUL. this afternoon.
Tho answer goes over the ground in
detail and the paper is OF great length.
The answer starts ~ with u denial
that tho Wheeling & Belmont company
has built or maintained n bridge that Is
equal to all kinds OF travel. Tho bridge
Is not fit for tho running OF street ears
propelled by electricity, and that by
reason OF tho refusal OF tho company to
allow electric cars to BIO run over its
bridge u new bridge was constructed.
Since tho construction OF tho new
bridge tho tolls derived by the old
bridge have neither been largo nor val
liable. The answer further states thar
a steam ferry was operated between the
city and Island until September, 1877,
tho landing on the Island side being
moved down about $50 feet below the
west pier. At the same time n ferry
was operated from the north end OF tho
wharf. 1t is also denied that D. @. List,
Daniel Zane and Henry Moore, trus-
tees. were ever owners Of any ferry
rights between tho Island and city.
The answer claims that the act Of the
Virginia legislature OF 1917 giving the
bridge company tho right to purchase
ferries, was given only Tor the purpose
OF exsinguishing ferries then in OPERA
ton. The answer goes on to state that
though the bridge company operated n
ferry prior to 1859, it has not since at
tempted to claim ferry privileges. The
answer calls attention to the fact that
the city took possession Of the ground
Mt tho foot OF Eleventh street, Tor II por.
ton OF the public wharf, adversely 10
the claim OF the plaintiff. II the plain
tiff ever did acquire ferry rights it has
long since forfeited them, through fail
ure to exercise them.
1t is also denied that there we're ever
any exclusive privileges, and that,
therefore, the plaintiff could never have
acquired such rights. However, if such
rights ever existed they were abolished
by the West Virginia legislature OF
lSS2. 1t is claimed that the property at
the foot OF Eleventh street is owned bS
the city, which had 4 perfect right to
give ferry right to the defendant. The
acquisition OF this land extinguished
any rights the bridge company may
have had for ferries.
The answer then goes into the story
Of the legal complications between the
Wheeling and Wheeling & Belmont
bridge companies, stating that the latter
mover asserted any easement or incor-
poreal hereditament. Next the answer
refers to the action OF the city council
and board of county commissioners in
granting the Jerry company certain
rights which enable them to operate
their ferry, and claims this action on
the part OF these bodies was valid.
The ground is next generally covered,
it being affirmed that the two bridge
companies about January LIST this year
entered into an illegal combination and
raised the tolls, and as a result property
on the Island has decreased in value
and people had been driven from that
part of the city. In self defonse the
people had joined together and es-
tablished a ferry, which is now being
operated not to make money, but in
order to secure 4 Just and reasonable
| rate OF tolls.