clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 1, Page 109   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

HAMILTON VS. ANNAPOLIS RAIL ROAD CO. 1Q9

ant had cut down valuable trees near it, the value of which
ought to be deducted from the amount due to him. After this
answer was filed, the trustees were made parties by amend-
ment of the bill, and in their answer took generally the ground
taken by that of the company; some testimony was taken, re-
lating to the value of the public house, and the terms on which
it was rented, the consideration of which was deemed un-
necessary by the Chancellor, under the view which he took of
the case:]

THE CHANCELLOR:

Nothing can be clearer, than that private property cannot
be taken for public use, without making just compensation to
the owner. The right of eminent domain gives to legislative
authority .the control of private property, for public uses, but
this power is subject to the condition, that a reasonable and
just compensation shall be made to the owner, and any attempt
to exert the power, without complying with the condition,
would not only be at war with the great principles of natural
justice, which lie at the foundation of the social compact, but
would be in direct conflict with the constitution of the United
States. It follows, therefore, irresistibly, that as the complain-
ant has not received compensation for that portion of his pro-
perty, which has, through the medium of this company, been
taken from him for public use, that he is now entitled to com-
pensation; and this compensation is to be paid him, not in the
bonds of the company, issued under the act of 1841, but in
money.

The bill takes the ground, and the argument of the complain-
ants solicitor urged the same view of the subject, that the land
condemned by the inquisition of August, 1838, was not neces-
sary for the use of the road, and that, therefore, as to that por-
tion of the premises, the company should be ordered by the
decree of this court to deliver the possession to the complain-
ant. I cannot bring myself to think that such a decree would
be at all justifiable. The 15th section of the act of 1826,
chapter 623, which so far as the mode of proceeding in the
10



 
clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 1, Page 109   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives