Edwards v. Southern Ry

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtGARY
Citation44 S.E. 748,66 S.C. 277
PartiesEDWARDS. v. SOUTHERN RY.
Decision Date14 May 1903

44 S.E. 748
66 S.C. 277

EDWARDS.
v.
SOUTHERN RY.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

May 14, 1903.


RAILROADS—OPERATION OF COMPETING LINES —RECOVERY OF PENALTY.

1. Act 1894, 21 St. at Large, p. 812, providing that no corporation shall purchase or lease any railroad in the state where such purchaser or lessee is interested in any competing line within or without the state, is not repealed by Const. 1895, art. 9, § 8, relating to the consolidation of railroad lines in the state; and a complaint that defendant railroad company has purchased the stock of a competing line under Act 1897, 22 St. at Large, p. 492, author izing the recovery of a penalty against any railroad company leasing or operating competing railroad lines within the state, states a good cause of action.

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Lexington County; Townsend, Judge.

Action by Isaac Edwards against the Southern Railway. From order dismissing complaint on demurrer, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

This is an action against the defendant for the penalty provided by statute for owning, leasing, or operating competing railroad lines within this state. The appeal herein is from an order sustaining a demurrer to the complaint. The complaint alleges: "(1) That the plaintiff is a resident and citizen of the county of Lexington, in said state. (2) That the Southern Railway Company is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the state of New Jersey, as this plaintiff is informed and believes, but which, under the provisions of section 8 of article 9 of the Constitution of this state, has become a domestic corporation of this state, and owning and operating several lines of railroad in the state of South Carolina, one of which extends from the city of Columbia, in the county of Richland, in said state, through the county of Lexington and through the town of Batesburg, in said county, to the city of Augusta, in the state of Georgia, known as the Charlotte, Columbia & Augusta Railroad; that the said Southern Railway Company, at the times hereinafter stated, also held by stock ownership or by lease a line of railroad, known as the South Carolina & Georgia Railroad, extending from the city of Columbia to the town of Branchville, in said state, thence from the town of Branchville by and through the town of Blackville, in said state, to the city of Augusta. (3) That, so owning and operating the said two lines of railroad, the defendant, the Southern Railway Company, on or about the 20th day of May, 1899, became the owner by purchase of the stock of all that line of railway running from Allendale, in Barnwell county, by and through the town of Barnwell, and by and through the town of Blackville, in Barnwell, by and through the town of Seivern, in Aiken county, to the town of Batesburg, in Lexington county, which, prior to that time, had been a competing line with the said Southern Railway at two points within the state of South Carolina, to wit, at Blackville, in the county of Barnwell, and at Batesburg, in the county of Lexington; and that the said Southern Railway, so owning the said railroads or holding the same by lease, has continued to operate the same since the said 20th day of May, 1899, within this state and through the said county of Lexington, contrary to the provisions of the act of the General Assembly approved the 2d day of March, 1897." The defendant demurred to the complaint on the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 practice notes
  • Parks v. Mills
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • January 4, 1907
    ...to its title, became a part of the only statutory law of the state, and the objection was properly overruled. Edwards v. Railway, 66 S. C. 277, 44 S. E. 748. Furthermore, the body of the act was germane to the subject expressed in the title thereof. State v. O'Day, 74 S. C. 448, 54 S. E. 60......
1 cases
  • Parks v. Mills
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • January 4, 1907
    ...to its title, became a part of the only statutory law of the state, and the objection was properly overruled. Edwards v. Railway, 66 S. C. 277, 44 S. E. 748. Furthermore, the body of the act was germane to the subject expressed in the title thereof. State v. O'Day, 74 S. C. 448, 54 S. E. 60......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT