French Broad hustler and Western Carolina Democrat. [volume] (Hendersonville, N.C.) 1915-1916, 1916-03-30

would warrant the charge that t1
plaintiff is a trust or that it is owned
by the Southern Power company or by
the Dukes, but if these facts appeared,
the. would not justify us in denyine
to it the recognition of it's property
rights
The shyness of evidence that the
Dukes own this Waterpower has been
apparent to everybody who read Judge
Clarks opinion originally, and that
shyness is increased by the turn Of
things. Judge Clark calls names
though. 1T appears that both the
president, the secretary and the treas
urer of the plaintiff company are di-
rectors in the Northern and Piedmont
r. R. company, which the latter in his
testimony states is known as the
Duke Road 1t is common knowledge
that the Southern Power company, one
of the companies reported by the gov
ernment as engrossing the water pow
er of this state, is controlled by the
same interests
The fact that the court disagrees as
to facts can be accounted for in the
different views as to the Duke Road. :"
Judge Allen cites the evidence, which
that the same interests own the con-
trolling stock in the Piedmont and
Northern and the Southern Power.
He had heard that road called the
Dukes Road.
eff, however, the plaintiff is a trust,
Judge Allen continues. "the- fact is
with he general assembly which
granted to it it's charter and from
which is derives all it's powers. 1t is
not claimed that these powers have
been exceeded, and if this can be shown
it ought to be pointed out in order that
the state may take steps to have the
charter forfeited"
Judge Allen then argues that the
sole question is one of condemnation
an6 the right to go to the jury. Hl
declares that the only evidence tend
ing to show the possibility of develop
ment by the local company was its tes-
timony that it could run dam to the
middle of the stream and DETECTING tbs
current, halfSof it could use it. Judge
Allen cites Angel on water courseT
section 100, showing that wherever
water sccFFse divides on two estates
the riparian owners of neither with
carry off any part of that stream with
out the consent of the other interest
Is it we're otherwise litigation would
be endless.
Is Also Classical.
Judge Allen also is classical. After
declaring that the general assembly
and not the courts have made the dis
tinction between the powers and rights
granted to the plaintiffs and defend,
ants the plaintiffs being the Interurbar
ard the defendants the HendersOnville
company, the supreme court must obey
mot thwart it's will
"It would seem,' Judge Allen says IL
conclusion, ''that the defendant who Is
represented as a poor man with 'one
little eve lamb (one-half of water
power on one side of a stream) Ough
Ito be greatful that it saved the paymen
OF $40,0 900 for another little eve lamb
(one-half of the stream on the oppo
site side) of the same size and weight
and kindred, which the jury has founC
was only worth $4,000.
cit will be remembered that Nathan
was dealing in figure of speech whez
he was talking to David and tha
David's anger was greatly kindlet
against the rich man and that Nathan
said to David Thou art the man."
Judge Allen does not enlighten either
the court or the world on what hi
thinks Judge Clark was dealing"