Durango semi-weekly herald., 1907-01-24
ARlZONA.COLORADO
D. & R. G. BATTLE

The Albuquerque Journal gives n
better idea probably than has been
| given before regarding the conten-
tions between the Arizona & Colo-l-
do and the Denver and Rio Graude
railways, with their side issues, as
| follows:
The Arizona a. Colorado Railway
company of New Mexico is one of
series of three roads-the Arizona e.
Colorado Railroad company OF Arizo-
ma. the Arizona G Colorado Railroad
company of Colorado. and the New
Mexico organization, the three unit
ing to form one system the route o.
which begins at Durango, Colo, and
runs to point near Manueito on
the Arizona line connecting with the
Santa Fe coast lines and also with
the Cananea, Gila Valley and Globe
railroad. of which latter line part
is built and in operation.
The Arizona & Colorado came m
to New Mexico, located, staked ard
adopted its line. or right of way as
far back as October, 1904. The Den
yer G. Rio orande, as soon as II learn
ed the Arizon e. Colorado was in
the field, also determined to enter
the field, and began what is claimed
was an attempt to obstruct the con-
struction OF the Arizona G. Colorado
line. and as the latter road claims,
without any authority of law the Den
yer & Rio Grande crossed its right
of way seven or eight times in
distance of twenty-five miles, with
out necessity, and having the oppor-
tunity, So 1t Is claimed, to con-
meet its lines in such way as to
reach whatever destination it de-
sired down the Animas valley, with
out 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 its work over the
Arizona G. Colorado route as adopt
ed. The district court for Santa Fe
county afterward, in June. 1906, dis
solved that injunction; but later the
| injunction was reinstated in the su-
| preme court of New Mexico, by a
| provision in its decreee on appeal
the Arizona & Colorado route or give
| bond to do SO should the final decree
SO hold. This bond was furnished
by the Denver & Rio Grande. which
road has since completed its con
struction.
The main contention on the part
of the plaintiff company, Arizona &
Colorado. is that the adoption of the
right of way by the company's board
of directors has the effect to appro-
pirate to 1t as against all except the
land owners, the right to take the
land traversed.
This position, as brought out in the
argument, is supported by long ar
ray of judicial decisions which holt
that the railroad company which
which first adopts line or route
is entitled TO 1t for a period of sil
years within which TO build its road
and that therefore the defendant b
an intruder; and moreover that IL
this case the defendant is an intrud
er without necessity OF being SO. 70
the reason that there is plenty o
. Denver & Rio Grande to build upo
, without interference with the plair
tins route.
The Denver & Rio Grande answer
: to this that the plaintiff company
3 not in good faith and does not inten
: to build its road. To this contentio
+ the plaintiff replies that II 1t did nc
e intend to build 1t would not have g:
pended several hundred thousaD
= dollars in preparation to build an
+. would not have caused to be mad
Q three different surveys in order
d arrive at the best route for trunk, {
l. through line.
y The defendant claims that Il
y plaintiff can get OF the line 1t hi
It adoptsdt and get Just ~ good II n
bsttss route elsewhere. The plai