New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1849-09-24
Hud-nn River RnlIron Q +.


Hudson River Railroad.
The terminus of this Road in the City ia mat
ter of large importance {, all who take interest
in the enterprise, or in the prosperity OF our City,
and we trust that the Board Of Assistants VIII
como 70 an immediate decision in the matter. The
road is now ready for running to Peekskl, and It
/. urgently necessary that the Company should be
able to go on rapidly with the depot buildings and
street track at this end.
We present below tho substance Of the remarks Of
Mr. Butler in favor OF concurng with the Board of AL
dermen In their resolution extend the road 20 Cham
bers-st made after Mr.. Blocker, hr. Cornell and Mr.
Srang had been heard by the Committee Of the Board
Of Assistant Aldermen in opposition
Mr. Butler stated, that much time had been con-
sumcd In the debate he should have nothing to say on
the subject unles. II understood on all hands that
the matter should be closed that evening especially az
he had twice presented his views length before other
Committees aud the matter had been widely discussed
IN the public prints and in all circles snd well I'M
derstood and nothing could perhaps be said which at
late day would change the mind Of any member OF
the Committee Unless that was agreed 10 ne should
take his seat and let the matter go TO the Committee
as II then stood
NJ Sraas -Nr Wright Of New-Jersey will finish
the debate this evening.
Mr.. Baaisr-I will occupy your time but very few
raised by Mr. Cornell that power does not exist TO
permit the of the street for this object The Char
ter declares that the Directors may locate their rail
road on Any II the avenues OF the City OF
York westerly of and including the Eghthavenue.
and westerly Of Hnfs0Ha provided the assent OF
the Corporation of said City be hrst obtained tor such
location" The restriction contained in this clause was
introduced into the bill when pending before the Legs
ature the friends OF the Harlem Road and prevents
even with the OF that Company any location on
line east of Hudsonss freely admit that you would
have no power the subject except under the
authority OF the State Liquidation, and you are confined
10 the simple question whether Hudson e. or some
street of IL may De used. The Corporation has
already sssened the OF West a. as FAR south As
Canal and have reported In favor Of extending the rails
up Canal and down Hudson TO Chambefsst and We now
apply for with that proceeding on your
part
Mr. Cornell denies the power. His remarks before
you havsreached the dignity Of argument
than any made BY those who have preceded me- ana
shall conane myself 10 notice OF them regret tnst
he should have repested here iOcuar remark made
by me 10 him In the confidence OF friendly intercourse,
but satisfied that Il resulted from the heat OF Dc
bate and that II ia not necessary further 10 notice IL
proceed therefore. TO the question under discussion
aud inquire on what consideration the asser referred
In the act expected to be granted or ~itnne,d
You will undoubtedly carry out the intention OF the
Legislature Ia this respect In granting cnsrtsr 70
this Company authorizing road 70 be Dull. along the
margin OF the River through villages and towns, and
the most valuable property, they have ac'ed on lsse
views Of public policy In authorizing inc s1epnon
this policy; they have not directed the Corpo-
ration OF this City TO inquire what the views were Of
the few OF Huds0Dst any more tnsn tney nave
the views other parts OF the line those
Who have preceded me In the discussion, have treated
this a. II IL entirely local question, snd tney
seem 10 expect that you will adopt II also as your rule
OF action Itreaches far CHER ihsn the few esdents
about csnal-st and 81 Johns PARK suppose. IL 10
general question which concerns the whole City and al
s interests II the construction q this road on any
part OF the line had not been treated by the Le9'la
81 N Ia
of few any part OF the line, not loot OF
il could have been constructed, TOR there are men 10
every community who have pecuiisropinions on many
subjects and whose opposition, fosnded on tner sngu
ariues would have been declared and persisted In 10
defiance Of the general interest The Legislature
have acted throughout In disregard of mere local opn
ion on a broad and general view Of the whole matter
and your action should be- in harmony with theirs
Az public question shall therefore consider H. ana
il Is for you 10 consider on that view whether me use
OF public msy be permitted for this object
Our Courts have held that Railroad Corporation j.
In the nature Of public Corporation and the use Of
public streets rails has been permitted within this
Haven Railroad nov enjoy that privilege under the
cot Of Corporation 10 the case oil orc Oh tne
against the urgent oppression made Al the sart y resi-
dents In the B0wery. Ia All Other important cities
throughout this country the Pryilegei enjoyed
but vet m learned friend Mr. Cornell wakes up alter
twenty years Of full enjoyment OF here ana elsewhere
By numerous Railroads, 70 toe discovery Of principle
which II sound would enable any on street
u,ed for trains to destroy the privilege 10 morrow. II
such were the law Of the land u would have been dis
covered and acted Far from ibis being the case,
the point has been rssed aud overruled In this and
otaer Staies and tho decisions have oeea July &C
quiesced ia. You will Of course De governed by the
dec sOns Of our oxa tribunals, and 20 those vii Re
Ter you
The leading case ia reperts is that Of James H.
Hamilton an owcer in Broome st. sAinst The Harlem
Railroad Co for permanent injunction against laying
or ung rzis IN front Of his property The matter
vas fully argued in the Court Of CnsncerT. The case
fully reported 10 Of the last volumes OF Paige,
and you are doubtless familiar with the decision Inc
injunction denied, and the laying Of the track &C
ccrdng 10 tie terms Of tie act and the consent Of the
Corporaton was held 70 be lawful ~ that tribunal
A decision Of The same character was made BY the
Kentucky Court OF Appeals in the Of owner IN
street IN Lexington OF Louisville, HbO made Ike sp
ocer Of that Court i mastery aac Is mentioned
With appreciation BY Chancellor Kent In the last edition
Of nis Commentaries. The point decided was that
although the public took only -ssenent or rssnt Of
travel aid The fee Of the remained IN the adja
owners yet that the OF the street by railroad
consistent viii the public objects for which Il was
opened and was lswful-that railroad was rev and
grea; instrument VI pubic convenience and was %
be recognized such by the Courts Decisors OF this
character have been made wherever the question Ia.
been raised and n this country and In al countries they
have been scquiesced IN "A settled law.
The authority derived from these decisions am vii.
Log u sbAndon unless can convince YOU they are
founded GA good and sound icy. few owners
sroand ST JOINS Park declare E Is unia s.ul 10
lay down rss IN HudsonsL when the terms Of the
act Of the Legislature complied with II THIS . true
OF H1dso1-st II q also true Of Oae Hundred AMI
Tvrny II Ct and Of every avenue sni street on this
issnd. The Zee Of al Of them rses general thing
IA me adjacent owners The Isr ssr0ss iss safeguard