The Birmingham age-herald., 1902-06-17
Argument in Injunction Suit
 EnIiVenGd by Attorneys PROBABLY CONCLUDE TODAY
Campbell Will Make Closing Argument This Morning for the Seaboard, and the Case Will Go
 to the Judge.

Argument was resumed yesterday in the Chancery Court in the motion of the seaboard Air Line to dissolve an in- junction issued against 1t by Chancellor Carmichael at the instance of the Belt Line and which prohibits the Seaboard from building any tracks on the rights of way recently granted 1t.
 Mir. F. H. Cabaniss and Mir. Alex Lon don presented the Belt Lines case, and MT. E. K. Campbell will make the con- cludlng argument this morning for the Seaboard.
 Mir. Cabaniss contended yesterday that the Belt Line had a perfect title to the 26 foot right of way in the streets claim ed by 1t, and urged that the injunction be not dissolved and the Seaboard allow ed to ruin the Belt Lines property by paralleling its tracks. Incidentally he referred to the Seaboard as freebooter.
 Mir London In his argument spoke Of President Williams of the Seaboard and MT. Walker Percy, one of It's attorneys, as the Napoleon of railroads and the Butcher of law, and said that this com bination ought to awe the Belt Lne but 1t did not. Incidentally he referred to the Seaboard as a hawk. and said that instead of the Belt Line trying to holdup the Seaboard, the Seaboard had the Belt Line down, was sitting on It's head, kicking 1t in the stomach with the hope of knocking the breath out of 1t.
 Proceedings Begin.
 Court opened at half past nine. MT. Cabaniss who was to make the opening argument had an array of books before him stretched out on a table like rows of soldiers.
 I've have been accused of being cheer full optimists," began MT. Cabaniss "and we admit there is some truth in the ac- cusation for after hearing the lengthy argument of counsel for the Seaboard (Mr. Percy), we feel more hopeful than ever. The burden of his song was to the effect that we had no title to the 26 foot strip which the Belt claims, and that it has only the right to use the tracks now laid.
 NASN 1t is clear beyond the shadow of a doubt In 1885 the Elyton Land Company, which owned all of the property In the city, be- gan to construct belt railway. In 1887 the Highland Avenue and Belt Railway was chartered, with the right to purchase from the Elyton Land Company all its railway rights, properties and franchises. Jf ha had right to build this railway, as has been stated, it's acts were subsequently ratified by this charter to the Belt Railway, which gave 1t the right to operate the road. Under the charter of this company 1t had the right to construct its tracks along any of the public highways of the county, and the streets over which this controversy has ariven, were not then in the city limits. And our contention Is that under the conveyance from the Elyton Land Company to the Highland Avenue and Belt Railroad was conveyed to 1t a right of way in these streets which could not be taken away without It's consent.
 Reads Authorities.
 MT. Cabaniss then read some author ities to show that the dedication of streets to the public by a land owner conveyed only the right of passage by ordinary mems, and did not include the right to lay tracks; and that the building of a railroad on such streets would be an ad- ditlonal servitude on the streets for which the abutting property-owner was entitled to damages. That the Elyton Land Com pany, which owned substantially all of the property abutting on these tracks had the right to make a conveyance of It's claim for any damage-that the consent for it to occupy the streets was an ease ment-an incorporeal hereditament
 We say, therefore, that the deed from the Elytcn Land Company to the High land Avenue and Belt Railway conveyed to 1t an easement, a property right, which was transferable to others and which that company could only lose by some ac. Of It's own.''
 MT. Cabaniss discussed this deed, hold ing that 1t was not void for uncertainty in locating the 26-foot right of way, as had been claimed by counsel for the Sea- beard.
 'I say,'' continued MT. Cabaniss, that the Belt Line acquired just as much title to this 26-foot strip under this convey ance as 1t would have acquired If 1t had condemned it and pad for 1t. Does the fact that it has not been occupied at once give any other railroad that happens to
 Ingram T,ithia daljvarad