The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1895-02-16
TO GO TO THE STATE COURTS.
THE MACON AND DUBLIN Allow
ED TO PETITION THEM

For Power TO Condemn the Graded
Rigbt-Of-Way Belonging TO the
Savannah and Western Railroad,
Wanted for Use by the Macon and
DUbIin's Proposed Extension to
Savannah-Judge Speer Allows the
Receivers to Treat With the Ma
con and Dublin and fn the Event
of "a Failure to Agree There Will
BE no Objection TO the Latter APP
plying to the state Courts.
After a hearing in the case of the
Macon, Dublin and Savannah Railroad
Company against the Savannah and
Western railroad and B. A. Denmark,
Judge Speer granted an interlocutory
order yesterday allowing the Macon and
Dublin to proceed to take proper steps
to secure control of a right-of-way ex-
tending from the Ogeechee river about
thirty-five miles to the westward which
is the property of the Savannah and
Western, now in possession of receivers
of the United States court.
This right-of-way crosses the Savannah
and Western at Ellabell. 1t belonged
formerly to the Savannah, Dublin and
Western Shortline, and was sold under
decree of the superior court of Chatham
county in 1889 for ss5 900, it having been
bought for the Savannah and Western
! by Mr.. B. A. Denmark.
The Macon and Dublin now operates
/ ffty-four miles of the line from Macon
20 Dublin. 1t stated in the petition to
the court that it desired to secure con-
troll of this right-of-way which had been
| constructed but was not in use, and
asked to be allowed to negotiate with
/ the receivers for it, or in case of failure
to reach an agreement to take proper
steps to have it condemned for it's use
in the construction of it's line into Sa-
vannah.
Col Clifford Anderson of Macon and
Mr.. John NJ. Stubs of Dublin appeared
for the Macon and Dublin, and Mr.. s.
b. Adams for the receivers of the Sa-
vannah and Western. Col. Anderson held
that the ownership of this right-of-way
by the Savannah and Western was a VIC
lation of the constitutional clause against
| the consolidation of competitive lines of
railroad. The property, however, being
| in the hands of receivers of the United
States courts, no disposition could be
made of it. except by consent of those
| courts, and the application was made
also on that account, to be allowed to
institute proceedings in the state courts,
so when such proceedings were begun
| there would be no contempt of the Uni
ted States courts.
Mr.. Adams contended the court had no
Jurisdiction in the matter, as the Savan-
nah and Western road was in the hands
of the United States courts of Alabama.
He also held that there were no grounds
for the relief sought in the bill of the
plaintiffs.
In his decision Judge Speer reviewed the
! history of the property in brief, and said
that the property, in its present state,
was useless, it's owners showing no DISPOSE
| ton to build upon it. They hold it, he said,
Just as any private citizen would hold
| lands over which it was desirable to build
a railroad, for the benefit of the people and
the interests of those concerned.
He looked upon the request Of the Ma
con and Dublin as an equitable one, and
held that as the property was in the
| hands of the receivers of that court, it
had jurisdiction in the subject matter of
the petition brought before it. He held
the constitutional provision with regard to
competing corporations applicable in this
4 case, it being a matter between Georgia
corporations, and having nothing to do
with interstate commerce. He said he
would not attempt to pass on the point
made by Mr.. Adams, with reference to the
state law on the subject as that was a
question which should be appropriately
/ entrusted to the state courts.
The order. taken in accordance with his
decision, simply permits the receivers of
the Central and the Savannah and West
ern to treat with the Macon and Dublin
for the sale of the right-of-way desired,
and if a price can be agreed upon, to report
to the court as soon as this is done for
confirmation. In case no agreement is
reached within ten days after the grant
ing of this order, and it is very likely
that none will be, the Macon and Dublin
is given the right to apply to the state
courts for condemnation proceedings
against the property wanted. without be-
ing in any way in contempt of the United
States court, in whose hands the prop
erty now is. Judge Speer did not pass
however, upon the right of the Macon and
Dublin to institute such proceedings in the
state courts. nor of the jurisdiction Of
these courts in the matter. leaving these
! questions for the determination of the