The Bamberg herald. [volume] (Bamberg, S.C.) 1891-1972, 1910-04-14
VICTORY FOR RAILROAD
STATE SUPREME COURT REVERS-
ED RAMBERG CASE.
Right Of Way of the Company and
Use of Street by Citizens
of Town Involved.

COlumbl April 6.-lne ootIH-
ern Railway gained victory when
the Supreme Court to-day reversed
Bamberg case in which the right OF
way of the company and the use Of a
street by citizens of that town are in
volved. The opinion follows:
The State of South Carolina, in
the, Supreme Court, November term,
1909, w. P. Blume, plaintiff-respon-
dent, VS.. Southern Railway Compan,
Carolina division,) defendant-appel-
liant. Reversed. Opinion by D. E.
Hydrick, A. J.
Plaintiff recovered judgment
against defedant for obstructing an
alleged street In the town Of Bam-
berg, by building thereon depot and
platform, and thereby blocking the
way to and from plaintiffs residence.
The alleged street is a part Of de-
fendant's right of way. Plaintiff at
tempted to prove title by prescription
in the town to that portion of the
defendants right of way in question
by showing an adverse use thereof by
the public as street for more than
twenty years.
It appears that part of the town
of Bamberg has been built up along
defendants right of way, and that at
least since 1894, the right of way has
been laid out on map of the town
as street, and that for many years,
q part of It has been worked and
Kept up as street by the town au-
thorities, and property bounding on
It has been sold with reference to it
as a. street. It does not appear,
however, that the defendant or any
of Its predecessors in title knew that
the right of way was laid out on the
town map as a street, but they knew
that part of it was worked by the
town and used as street.
The testimony shows that the por-
ton of the right of way now in ques-
ton was not worked or used by the
public as a street prior to the year
1897, when plaintiff purchased and
built dwelling house on the right of
way, which is described in his deed
as IA "street, known as North Rail-
road avenue" But, for some twenty
or thirty years previous to that time,
there had been path, or road, along
that portion of the right Of way op-
posite to the lot bought by plaintiff,
and for some distance along the rail-
road. Over this road crossties and
wood had been hauled and deposited
on the right Of way for railroad pur-
poses; and a2few persons, who lived
in the section peyond plaintiffs lot,
went along the right Of way to and
from their houses; but the road, or
path, was not generally used by the
public: The depot and. platform were
built In 1905.
- The South Carolina Canal and
Railroad Company was incorporated
by an Act of the Legislature, and
built the railroad now owned by the
defendant. The Act Of 1888, I'll
Stat, ss4,) provides that. in the abb
sence OF. contracts with owners Of the
lands through which the road was
built, it shall be presumed that the
land, on which the road was built, to-
gether with one hundred feet on each
side Of the centre Of the road, has
been granted by. the owners thereof
to the company, and, that the. COM
spany and its successors shall have
good right and title thereto, SO. long
as the same shall be. used for the
purposes of said road. In 1888, that
company acquired, by purchase, the
fee simple title to tract of land,
which includes that portion OF the
right Of way now in question. The
defendant is the successor in title to
the rights and property of that COM
pany.
When all the evidence was in, de-
fendant moved the Court to direct a
verdict in its favor, on the ground
that no use of it's right Of way had
been proved Incompatible with its
use by defendant and it's prede-
cessors in title for the purposes for
which it had been acquired; and,
therefore, no prescriptive right to the
use thereof as a street could have
been acquired by the public. The
motion was refused.
The facts of this case bring 1t
squarely within the principles an
nounced in Matthews VS.. Ry., 81 S.
S., 4s9, where it was held that the
public cannot acquire by prescription
the right to use the right of way of a
railroad company in manner incon-