Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 4.djvu/315

 N. P. E. ed; 'vl B. & M. ». 00, soi �from Schriber's heirs, Jrnnning aeross complàînant's ftackj and the land necessary for operating its road, could not maintain ejectment. If the Company is not à trespasser, and cannot be ousted by ejectment, and an injonction would not issue, it bas a rigbt of prOperty as well as a license. Its title would be complete and perfect on the payment of com- pensation when ascertained. �The plaintifif insists that the right to compensation îs barred under section 7 of its charter, through default of Schriber or his heirs to claim such compensation within six years after the opening of its road, and. authorities are not wanting to sustain this view, (1 Eedfield on Eailways, 300, and note ;) but it is not necessary to decide this no-w. Conceding the right to enforce a claim for compensation, the plaintiff still has a property interest which cah only be taken by the de- fendants deriving title with knowledge of the situation, on strict compliance with the law of Minnesota. The law does not authorize either party tO initiate proceedings to condemn; it allows only the onedesiritig the land. �No award has been made — tio cOtnpensatîon ascertainedl Unless consent or license was giveli to defendants to enter upon the plàintifif's right oî way and trace, and construct the Crossing, in view of the constitution and laws of Minnesota by virtue of which only can it exercise the right, damages must first be appraised and paid or seciured previous to entry. See Cooley's Constitutional Limitations, title, "Eminent Domain ;" 30 Wis. 105 ; 36 Mich. 265, — the latter a railway-crossirg case. �No damages having been appraised, nas permission or license been granted so as to prevent the plaintiff from resist- ing the occupancy of its land and track for that purpose ? v �The amended answer of defendants sets up a license to make a crossing over plaintiff 's track, given by it, and alleges that the plaintiff, also, by representations encouraged the building of defendants' road, and gave it to understand that it -would assist in effecting the crossing, and interpose lo objections thereto. The answer is sworn to by E. B, AnguB, James J. Hill, and a. B. Stickney ; and an affîdavit ����