New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1848-12-02
staten leland Ferry.

lhis case was argued before the Controller 10
be Office, yesterday at P NJ Mr. Hiram Ketehur sp-
pearing IN behalf Of the people Of staten Island Mr.
krtctum proceeded 70 sag that number Of pleas had
been produced on tbs subject Captain VANDERBILT;
in possession 81 a clip aud pier AZ lessee Of ,he Cor
poraiion entirely uures,ricted In his use while the
term lasts for which be holds i,-tha il s his FOR
what purpose hs msy please the only Obligation be s
under "a 10 pay the stipulated rent Those whom be
represented suppose that Captain Vanderbilt possesses
this pier for Ferry between Staten Island ard White
hall and il being Ferry s under the control Of the
Corporation Of the City Of New York Il csnno, be re-
garded far As the Ferry concerned private prop
ety he supervision and control IL 10 the hands Of the
Corporation. This Is the point IN difference between
them. We are entirely satisfied, said Mr. heichum
trstt be settled by you upon terms which consider
Just Now In the hfsi place Captain Vanderbilt claims
tls by cOntracttha; be Il entitled 10 this 81 and pier
The contract alleged is which arises out Of certain
proceedings Of the Corporation sferTard assented
By Mr. Nsnoe rot rather the Richmond Turnpike Co
10 not contract drawn up between parties but one
which arises out Of different papers Where there i
contract IN writing believe you cannot depart from
the writing 10 explain the contract Here several
writings and according o. rule you are - obtain their
Intentions from them. This rule . liable 70 excep
ton which Hill state. state 10 from the opinion %
Mighty respectable authority The gentleman here
quoted from the fret volume Of Greenleaf in support
Df bis statement. and proceeded What the cir
cums,snces In which this contract was made between
me parties Il will be remembered that the contract
upon which Cspt NanderDilts claims the pier
made In the year li5 To the year SOS the lease OF
staten Island Ferry made 20 the ultOn Bank Be
fore that lease expired the Fulton Bank assigned i %
the Richmond Turnpike Company and before the term
81 it, expiration this Company applied for renewal OF
1t tor ten years which brought il down 10 the year
LII Tho last lease restricts Il % the Of Ferry
alone. Mr. Ketchum referred 20 the proceedings %
prove tnst the Ferry bad always been regarded a.
ferry and subjected % the restrictions which the Cor
p0rat0n.0 the City might think proper % impose. Inc
state Legislature have Invariably treated 10 Ferry.
snd Dof 10 be regulated by the same laws which gov
ern private contracts.
The Richmond Company which ia the party with
which the Corporation has reated) was Incorporated
March 81. 1-lj This Company was an artificial person
purpose Of wharfage denied. They had no right to
take tor any other purpose but that Of ferry These
were the crcumstances Of the party Al the time the ap
p.caiion was made We do not demand anything that
j. uniust-we merely ask Of the Controller that the
Corporation in any arrangement viii require the pris
lcge of going from Whitehall 20 Staten Island terry
privilege and farther that they keep the control OF
those privileges under Their supervision. As ferry
franchise is matter OF public concern il has always
been the property Of the people and ii il than
idle for any person 10 prove the contrary. The right
Of fsrrisge IN England has always belonged ~ the
Cruwnin this country belongs 70 the people and IL
subject TO their laws and nveniences for the citizens
should not be oppressed In their intercourse with any
part Of the country aud their convenience should not
be placed the control Of one individual We only ask
that the Common Council keep the control Of this fran
chse In their handsse that II any deprived Of
their rights they may have the Common Council 20
refer II was here left 20 the decision Of the Con
troer the power being vested in him and no farther
.ytf,r f.ba 10