SATURDAY.
(Before the LORD CHANCELLOR and Lord Justice TURNER.)
THE LONDON, BRIGHTON, AND SOUTH COAST RAILWAY COMPANY v. THE LONDON AND SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY AND THE PORTSMOUTH RAILWAY COMPANY.
The further arguments in this part-headed motion were resumed this morning. The matter originally came before Vice Chancellor Wood on a motion for an injunction to restrain the defendants from using the joint station at Landport, Portsea, of the plaintiffs and the South-Western Railway Company for the booking or the transit of passengers or goods destined for or coming from the Portsmouth Railway, or any part thereof, except only so far as related to the transmission (upon the line of railway laid down in the station) of traffic conveyed on the public service to or from the line belonging to the Crown, leading to the dockyard, or other naval and military establishments at Portsea or Portsmouth. By an act passed in 1847 a portion of the Portsmouth Extension of the Brighton and Chichester Railway, westward of the junction near Havant, was to form a joint line of the South-Western and the Brighton and South Coast Companies, and be regulated by a committee composed of the members of the two companies. In 1848 a contract was drawn up between the three companies, conformably to the act of the preceding year, for working the joint line to the South-Western and Brighton and South Coast lines. Other terms were agreed on in 1852. In 1853 the Portsmouth Railway Act was passed, authorising a line from Havant to Godalming, where a line from Guildford came in. There was a subsequent act in 1858, empowering the uses of the joint line, and a portion of the Brighton and South-Coast line. This statute expressly excluded Landport as a station for any other traffic than that of the public service, except as might be agreed upon, and in case of no agreement an independent station was to be built at Portsea. The Portsmouth Railway Company had endeavoured to arrange with the Brighton and South Coast Company for the use of the latter's line between the two points of junction and the station at Havant, and failing any agreement there had been a reference to arbitration. What was complained of was that there had been an agreement between the South-Western and the Portsmouth Companies for using their line without the consent of the Brighton and South Coast Company. The Vice Chancellor thought the question turned entirely on the construction of the act of 1847, relating to the use of the joint line and station, and that bona-fide traffic on the South-Western line from London to Godalming, or vice versa, and ultimately over the joint line from Havant, could not be deemed otherwise than South-Western traffic, although there might be a difficulty as to traffic starting from Petersfield, or any point on the Portsmouth Railway, as it could not be said to have ever been on any part of the South-Western line proper. His honour, therefore, considering the question in dispute as a mere dry point of law, refused to make any order upon the motion. An appeal was brought from that decision to this court, which was ordered to stand over until the hearing of the cause, and stood over accordingly until the 26th of April, when the case was opened.
Mr. Rolt, Mr. Willcock, and Mr. J. W. Taylor were for the plaintiffs; Sir R. Bethell, Mr. G. M. Giffard, Mr. Baggallay, and Mr. C. T. Simpson, for the defendant.
Mr. Wilkock having replied,
Their Lordships reserved their judgment.