The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1897-05-05
NAY CONSOLIDATE
COAST LINE ACT BEFORE
| THE CIRCUIT COURT.

Columbia Register, 9th.
The Atlantic Coast Line consolida-
tion Act came up for a legal interpre.
tation yesterday IN the Circuit Court
IL 10 . very important matter to the
railroad company ss well as to its
patrons By consolidation the latter
Will get continuous rate, which
means a lower one. over the various
lines of the company over which a
shipment is made On The other
hand, is the consolidation Act is not
constitutions, then the company did
not want TO go into It, as their vast
interests, bonds, securities, &C.,
would be materially affected. The
bearing of the case was friendly
one and, although the suit was
brought by the Commission. they
really wanted the jury TO decide in
favor Of the railroad, for it was at
their instance that the. consolidation
Act was introduced and passed
There really was no contention be-
tween the opposing" parties, as
both wanted the jury to decide
whether any Of the roads included in
the system were psreliel or compel
ing: IF NOT, then there is no consti-
tutional prohibition against the con-
soiidation. TIE State was represent
ed by Attorney General Barber and
the railroad company was represent
ed By Mr. J T. Barron.
The complaint in the case, after
the usual legal forms and prelimina-
Ties. sets forth
That at the last session of the
General Assembly of South Carolina.
an Act entitled ssAn Act to incorpo-
rate the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
Company Of South Carolina and to-
authorize the consolidation of Ger
tain railroads under that name" was
passed and approved and that the
first section of said Act provides
ssThat it shall be lawful fox the Viii
;mington, Columbia and Augusta Rail
road Company, the Northeastern
Railroad Company, the Cheraw and
] Darlington Railroad Company. the
Central Railroad Of South Carolina,
the Manchester and Augusta Rail-
road Company and the Florence Rail
road Company to be consolidated
into one company. and each of the
same companies is hereby given full
poHer to do all such things as may be
necessary to effect such consolidation
under the provisions and terms of the
Act"
That in Section 5sof said Act it is
provided that the said corporation
may make contracts and acquire
and transfer property, both real and
personal, iscluding shares of stock in
other corporations, but not majority
thereof in any PARALLEL or competing
railway companies"-to which said
Act reference is hereby craved, as q
part of this complaint, as often as
may be necessary
That Section I, Article 9, of the
Constitution of 1895 provides: mo
railroad or other transportation com
pany. no telegraph or other transmit
ting corporation, or the lessees, pur-
cbasers or managers of any such cor
poraaion shall consolidate the stock,
property or franchise of such cor
poraaion with. as lease or purchase.
the works or franchise of, or IN any
other railroad or other transportation.
telegraph or other transmitting COM
paDy, owning or having under its
control a parallel or competing line !;
and she question whether railroad or
other transportation, telegraph or 9th.
er transmitting companies are paral
lei or competing lioes shall, when
demanded by the party complaint.
be decided by jury, as in other civil
cases That some of the railroad
companies which it proposed to con-
so'idate under the aforesaid Act, to
wit: The Wilmington, Columbia and
Augusta, and Augusta, the Cberaw
and Darlingtan; the Wilmington,
Columbia and Agusta and the Man
chester and Augusta the Cheraw and
Darlington aud northeastern the
Manchester aud augusta aud the
Central of South Carolina the Flor
ence and Wilmington, Columbia and
Augusta, or some two Or more Of the
said railroad companies own or have
under their control parallel or com
peting lines, and under the inhibition
contained in the Constitution, as
hereinbefore recited, can be consoli
dated, under the Act aforesaid.