The daily morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1883-1899, 1895-07-02
RIGHT-OF-VAY NATTER
Trial Of the Suit Against H. w.
COrbett.
NOMINAL DAMAGES ASSESSED
Jury Examine the Property aud AZ
ter Hearing Witnesses Assess
Damages at $75.

Is The suit of the Astoria and Columbia
River Railway VS.. H. w. Corbett ct. al,
for right OF way through the latter's
dock property below the Parker House
occupied the entire attention Of the cir
cult court yesterday.
A special jury was selected from resi-
dents of the surrounding country in Clat-
sop county and the larger part OF the
day was consumed in the examination Of
witnesses as to the value OF the property
end he'beneftts to be derived by Its own
er from the building of the railroad. A
large number OF witnesses were examined,
among them DR.. A. Kinney and ID. X.
Warren, for the road, and Mr. Corbett In
his own behalf and Mr.. Gillett, OF Port
land, for the defense. The evidence for
the defense largely showed that the prop
erty In Its present condition was not
worth a large sum hnd that 1t was not
producing much income; that It would
undoubtedly be made valuable and pro-
fit producer with the advent of the rail-
road. The jury went in a body about
noon and examined the property, through
which fifty-foot right of way is asked.
Mr. Corbett in his defense claimed $751; 900
damages by reason of the loss Of the
fifty-foot strip.
In the late afternoon counsel made their
arguments. c. w. Fulton and Judge Tay-
lor appeared for the railroad and Judge
Strhhan for MIR. Corbett. Judge Taylor
opened the case by arguing the points
of law and citing the authorities in sup
port OF their suit. He stated to the jury
the bearing Of the law upon the matters
at Issue and the points of evidence adj
duced In the trial. In terse and we'll
chosen language he drew the natural de-
ductions 10 be made from the evidence
and the law and rested his argument.
Judge Strahan replied and pointed out
some difference of opinion in the authori-
ties and in his talk to the jury stated that
1t was not possible to realize the rosy
hued picture Of prosperity drawn by some
OF the witnesses and that while he hear
tily wished all of the prosperity and
happiness mapped out by the projectors
Of the railroad might be realized, yet the
cold fact remained the mere building Of
the little road to Goble to connect with
the defunct Northern Pacific would not
accomplish the desired result. He con-
tended THAT the measure of damages
to be awarded his client must be guaged
by the market value OF the property and
that other considerations did not much
enter into the problem.
Mr.. 9. w. Fulton, for the railroad, then
made his argument In rebuttal. He show
ed the property through which right OF
way was desired was only a wharfage
privilege and not a fee simple title; that
the property was on the Columbia river
below low water tide mark and to which
all had certain right; that Mr.. Corbett
held IAN undivided one-half interest In
same; that the other owner had donated
his interest to the railroad, in the strir
claimed. and that 1t was a question which
half Mr.. Corbett owned He further
stated that the evidence showed that the
wharf was In IA dilapidated condition and
had been standing since 1867. that 1t had
cost the owner much money In repairs
and taxes, but had brought in no COM
mensurate income and never would un-
less something was done to enhance ite
value; that the defendant probably saw
an opportunity, In his sagacious and far
seeing financiering ability, to make the
citizens Of Astoria pay him enough dam
ages on the old wharf to enable him to
build IA new one to the dock line beyond
the railroad, which would reap him rich
rewards.
Mr.. Fulton further said that Mr.. Cor
bett was held in the highest esteem In
the state at large, and by Astorians In
particular, Tor his shreWdness and bugi-
ness ability, and upright character, but
that they did not agree with him as to
the measure OF damages on this piece of
property but believed that his profits
along with that of all others. would be
enhanced five times and outweigh any
damage that might accrue. and that all
Of these facts, as well as the earning ca
pacity OF the property should be taken
fnto consideration IN aaaao ofner N, A. -.
ages claimed. On the other hand, they
thought that Mr.. Corbett should not only
freely deed the right OF way to the road,
but should piay about the amount OF dam
ages claimed for making his property
valuable and an income producer.
The case was given to the jury at 1880
and after about an hours deliberation,
they returned a verdict for the defend
ant, assessing his damages at $75. Five
days were allowed by the court In which
to file an appeal.