Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1907-01-08
COMPLETE THE
RAILROAD CASE
I D A !
ARGUMENT IN LEGAL
BATTLE NEARING END
interesting Claims of Rival
Transportation Companies
in Suit Over Right Of Way in
San Juan County,

San Juan County,
1t is expected that argument in the
case of the Arizona a Colorado fall-
way company against the Denver ~
Rio Grande railway company VIII pc
completed before Judge Abbott IN
district court during the DAY. Inc
case which has been before the New
Mexico courts for the past eighteen
months, has been before Judge ADJ
bott on rehearing for the past week,
and has attracted considerable atten-
ton from lawyers and the pupiiO'
Ten hours was allotted for the argu-
ment and all of yesterday was occu-
pied by counsel in setting forth their
respective views of the merits u
their contentious. The case is an IN
teresting one and especially so since
1t shows the keen competition Tor
rights of way through western New
Mexico, where ten years age a ran
road was undreamed of.
The Arizona x Colorado railway
company Of New Mexico is one of a
series of three roads, the Arizona *
Colorado railroad company Of Ari-
IONA, the Arizona & Colorado railroad
company of Colorado, and the New
Mexico organization, the three uniting
to form one system the route of which
DtBlilS at puid ilEO, &oiOi da'f 49,
runs to a point near Manuelito on he
Arizona line, connecting with the
Santa Fe coast lines, and also with the
Cananea, ella Valley and Globe rail-
road, of which latter line a part Is
built and in operation.
The Arizona & Colorado came into
New Mexico, located, staked and
adopted it's line, or right of way, as
far back as October, 1904. The Dem
yer g. Rio Grande, as soon as II
learned that the Arizona & Colorado
was in the field, also determined to
enter the field. and began what IS
claimed was an attempt to obstruct
the construction of the Arizona q
Colorado line, and as the latter road
claims. without any authority of law
the Denver g. Rio Grande crossed its
right of way seven or eight times in
a distance of twenty-five miles, with
out necessity and having the opportun-
ity, so it is claimed, to construct its
line in such q way as to reach what
ever destination 1t desired down the
Animas valley, without crossing or
"encroaching upon the line Of the
Arizona & Colorado.
In May. 1905, the plaintiff company
in the case now before the court,
asked and obtained an Injunction TO
prevent the Denver & Rio Grande
from prosecuting it's work over the
- ALOild 1OlbA " - g
The district court for Santa Fe county
afterward, in June, 1905, dissolved
that Injunction; but later the injunc-
ton was ~reinstated in the supreme
court of New Mexico, by a provision
in its decree on appeal that the Dem
yer & Rio Grande quit the Arizona d
Colorado route or give bond TO do so
should the final decree so mold. This
bond was furnished by the Denver q
Rio Grande which road has since COM
pleted its construction.
The main contention on the part of
the plaintiff company, Arizona q Col
orado, is that the adoption of a right
of way by the company's board of d.
rectors has the effect to appropriate TO
it as against all except the LAND own
ers, the right to take the land ira
versed.
This position. as brought out in the
argument, is supported by a long ar
ray of Judicial decisions which hold
that the railroad company which
first adopts a line or route, is entitled
to it for a period of six years within
which TO build it's road and that
therefore the defendant is an intru-
der; and moreover that in this case
the defendant is an intruder without
necessity of being 50, for the reason
that there Is plenty of room in the
Animas valley for the Denver & Rio
Grandc to build upon without inter-
ference with the plaintiffs route.
The Denver * Rio Grandc answers
TO this that the plaintiff company is
not in good faith and does not intend
to build its road. To this contention
the plaintiff replies that If ii did noi
intend to build it would not have eX-
pended several hundred thousand
dollars i'm preparation to build and
would not have caused to be made
three different surveys in order to ar
rive at the best route for trunk. or
through line.
The defendant claims that tire
plaintiff can get off the line il has
better route elsewhere. The plaintiff
responds that it was there first, that
there is no reason for it to
abandon It's route, that il Is satisfied
with the one selected, that according
to the surveyors. il is the best one OBJ
%tainable. and that If for the
dalton of the Denver & Rio Grande
it can be required to get off the route
it has now adopted and choose an
other one then should another cor
poration enter the field and push the
plaintiff off a new route which it
might have selected. that ii would be
compelled in Difference to the same
argument to move on, and that this
argument carried to a logical conclu-
sion would in certain conditions.
keep the plaintiff moving on from one
location to another until il had been
forced to move off the map and thus
hamper 1t forever in the building of a
railroad.
The case has served. in addition to
the interesting legal questions brought
up. to bring out the fact of especial in
terest TO the people of northwestern
New Mexico. that both railroads ap-
pear to have been very much In earn
est in acquiring rights of way into the
territory and serve and to be served.
The Arizona q Colorado is repre-
scented in the action BY A. b. Renehan
and T. b. Catron Of Santa Re. II. h.
FERGUSON. OF Albuquerque. and p. w.
Ritter of Durango, Col. ATTORNEYS for
the Denver q Rio Grande are E y.
CLARK Of Denver A. j. Abbott Of Santa
Fe, and Reese McCloskey Of Durango.
NEW SUPERINTENDENT
10 EnDAAAII EAHnf nNEn