|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
442 THE BELLONA COMPANY'S CASE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE BELLONA COMPANY'S CASE.
On a motion to dissolve an injunction no ex parte affidavits can be read.—A motion
to dissolve an injunction is confined to the consideration of the statements of the
bill, and the answer responsive thereto.
A corporation constituted of many stockholders may be virtually extinguished by
all the stock being owned by one.—A gunpowder manufactory not a nuisance,
because of the loose manner in which the edifices have been constructed.
The clause of an act of incorporation which gives the power of eminent domain to
be construed strictly, but fairly.—The property of a corporation, as well as that
of an individual, is subject to be taken for public uses, under the power of eminent
domain.-What is such a public use as authorizes the taking of private property
to be so applied.—Where there are several public uses, the exercise of the power
of eminent domain may be so limited as to preserve them all.—A corporation con-
sidered as a mere citizen owner, within the meaning of the authority to exercise
the power of eminent domain.
THIS bill was filed in Baltimore County Court on the 25th of
August, 1831, by The Bellona Gunpowder Company of Maryland)
against The Baltimore and Susquehanna Rail Road Company.
The bill states, that the plaintiffs are a body politic existing as such
under the acts of 1814, ch. 78, and 1824, ch. 32; that the objects
of their incorporation were the manufacturing and vending of gun-
powder, and the carrying on of any other branches of manufacture
in their discretion; for which purpose they were authorized to pur-
chase and hold lands, in fee simple or otherwise, not exceeding
one thousand acres, and to erect thereon all needful buildings;
under which authority they had purchased a tract of land in Balti-
more county, containing less than one thousand acres, on which
they had erected mills and buildings needful and convenient for the
manufacture of gunpowder; that the plaintiffs had invested in this
manufactory, in real and personal property, from seventy to eighty
thousand dollars; that the defendants were incorporated by the act
of 1827, ch. 72, by which they were authorized to construct a rail
road from the city of Baltimore to some suitable point on the Sus-
quehanna river; under which authority they had located their road
nearly a mile over the land of the plaintiffs, so as to require the
removal of one of their buildings used for the purposes of their
gunpowder manufactory; that if the defendants were permitted to
construct their road as thus laid out, it would stop the works of
the plaintiffs for a length of time, and not only prevent them from
manufacturing the materials on hand, but oblige their present cus-
tomers to form connexions with other establishments; and that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
