This was a suit in ejectment, wherein the plaintiff based his claim of title to thе premises in dispute upon the instruments hereinafter quoted. To the judgment granting a nonsuit the plaintiff excepted. It is conceded by counsel that the controlling question is whether the instruments upon which the plaintiff bases his claim of title convey the title to the lands therein referred to, or merely an easement for railroad purposes. Each of the instruments to be construed, except the name of the grantor, is as follows: “For and in consideration of one dollаr in hand paid, I, [the named grantor], hereby sell and convey to Geоrgia Carolina & Northern Railway Company, its successors and assigns, thе following property: A strip of land extending fifty feet on each side of and at right angles to the center of the track or road bed of said line as the same may be located and established by the party of the second part, upon and over any and all land of the first party, situated in the county aforesaid, and in case of high banks or deep cuts, such additional width as may be necessary, not exceeding a total of two hundred feet. The party of the first рart shall have the right to cultivate so much of said land as does not interfere with its use for railroad purposes, but shall acquire no title to the same for such use; the party of the second part shall have the right to cut timber, move stones, earth, timber, gravel, etc., and make any other disposition of said land right and proper for rаilroad purposes. This property is conveyed to said company to be used by it for railroad purposes, either as right-of-way or depot grounds. If work is not commenced on said road in two yеars said property is to revert to party of the first part.” Held:
1. Keeping in mind the many elements which must be taken into consideration in the proper construction of a contract of the kind here involved (see
Jackson
v.
Rogers,
205
Ga.
581, 586,
2. The trial judge did not err in granting a nonsuit.
Judgment affirmed.