The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1850-02-03
The Camden and AmDoy Railroad.

sis IL desire to avail myself Of your widely crcu-
lated journal to state to the public the practical
of the recent decision Of the Court Of Error,
and Appeals In tho case of the Camden aud Amboy
Railroad Company vs. Briggs The act under which
the recovery in this had stands thus In the
Revived Statutes Of New Jersey. lsi7, p. col =
An act to prevent the taking OF unlawful toll or
fare on csnsls and railroads. Passed March IL, 1889
Whereas, complaints have arisen that soms of the
incorporated companies Of this State have taken a
greater amount OF fare toll than is allowed by Law
and also of the unequal uctustng aud unlawful rates
Of toll or passage money upon the several canals
railroads Of this ate-therefore,
BE it enacted by the Council and General Assembly
of this State and is hereby enacted by the
Of the same That any incorporated company or CON-
psnies in this State which i are, shall be autho
rzed by law to take toll to charge for the transpor
tation OF pas.tngers goods, wares or merohsodise,
which shall directly or indirectly through or by any
sgen director or other officer whatsoever take or de-
nand Of any passenger or person under any preence
whatever than the charge toll rates or fare al.
lowed by law, shall forfeit and pay the sum of one
hundred dollars for each and every such offence to be
prosecuted for ana recovered with costs before
tce Of the in any county OF this State through
which the said road canal may pass In the
Tor he use OF the person or persons for the
same.o
By the general statute Of limitations Of the State
actions for the recovery OF these penalties, when
brought by private person. must be instituted within
one year after the oEence was committed but If
brought BY the State may be instituted ~ any time
The legal consequences of the late decision as
penalty Of one hundred dollars may be recovered
fer every individual instance Of excessive charge for
the transportation OF merchandise either the rail-
road or the canal within year Perhaps not many n
stances Of the payment OF these overohsges have
red within one year But the companies have In some
instances ut Least since the decision OF the court below
rendered bills made out according to the old unlawful
rates and have accepted of the less and law
fu rates intending reserve right TO the
redue IL the decision of the Court Of Appeals should
have been in their tavcr The offence OF charging too
much as penal ss that Of taking payment of much
by tie language of the statute the penalty Is upon
every company which shall take or demand" OF any
persou, more than the lawful rates. Aud reasonably
and necessarily for the demand is the unlawful act
Of the company, 10 which the sfence consists the
ment Is the act ot the other party aud Is not
in the company, and the acce pance OF proGered pay
nert cannot be penal. If the company could with i'm
puniy demand unswfu fares sod put their customers
10 the trouble Of examining and construing theI char
ter every occasion that bill 10 rendered. TO zee
whether the rate Is legal and OF having an alteration
with the eompaDys agents and OF having suits hanging
over their heads 1t is obvious that the public conve
nepce would be greatly Ltertereu with The uulas al
dtrsnd L. therefore, the vexaous aud harrasstng act
OF tyranny against which statute of 1889 ia aimed
Every person against whom bills, made out accordi
TO the Illegal ixies Of charging have been rendered
within one whether paid or not and whether upon
the railroad or canal has right OF action for one
bunored dollars for every offence And the sut need
lot be bIoneht by the party sgsrieveo He may hand
lie bills over 10 other person and such person may
sue In his own name. Not day should be lost 10 Ia
Ltitutirg these cults.
The notion Of reversing the late decision Of the Court
Of Appeals In the supreme Court Of the United States
account of the uLconstitutionsity OF the above
the conI PsDes make 1t unlawful to charge beyond
certain iate snd then general statute imposes a
pepaity upon doing that which was siways unla"tal.
SO pairing the obg stons Of the contrast Of
Incorporation, the act Of 1853 directly enforces those
obligations Except In respect to things which their
charters specially license them to do corporations
much within the general penal and remedial legisls
ton Of the State iyats persons The ststenent OF
de.an to take he case to the Supreme OF the
United States Is gwen out by the managers, pasdy
with yies to srrest the panic which the decision hss
created in the sock market and partly 60 create delay
and ALLOW the suta Tor penalties to be outlA~sd.
2 The Illegally Of the four dollar charg, fer the
passsge bst~e.n New ycrk and Plia1eiphia rests
upon ground essentially nay dsutioaliy tae in
Law, ~ the Illegally on these tolls for trsn'porsehon
Tie public may rely uPon IL es thing certan as fact
i,t that the late decision o, ths Court Of Errors aud
Appeals directly ard eoncusiysly estsbhihe' the ilc-
eahy Of that four dollar charge Tor the OF
Pssssnssrs from city to city aod the night 60 recover
houdr,d dollars for every instance IA which ~ ma been
PAID demanded That charge has been discontioued
only since October last Everybody who, within a
year has paid four dollars passage money between the
cities should institute suit allow person to
do for the huNdrrd dollar penalty All that is
cessTy to send the Of the party and the date
OF The paymept 20 ,ome lawyer 10 New Jersey along
the line of the road, and direct eut Go be forthwith
brought. The compasies can be compelled to prodnee
their bills which will furnish evidence Of the pas
sage and the Advertisements Will fhow the rate Of
fares or In the companies should destroy their
way bills, which Il very probable thing the facts
OF the passage and payment can be proved oy the pas
eeIger himself provided be allows third person TO
bring the suit In his osn name, and Tor his sn Use
Every gentleman therefore, Ia New lofk aud fhs3el
ILis has psia this four dollar charge, sithin the
yea. ct Initstcn and who cssires TO promote At once
n intsret1 Of jutce and charity should direct suits
to fe brought in New Brunsyick Trenton, or some
other place along the road Ia the aud for the
Of poor y,rsou, poor Institution such Msg
dAlsr Asuu on wht In or witch tue party 4, disposed
center bounty, and the deposition of the psrson
Whe paid the four dollars may be taken, and will be
sufficient eytd, The suit may PROBABLY be brought
In any county through which any a the camden aud
Amboy Compapys roads pass but u would be Eater 20
bring " Ia n county through which the road on whioh
the nsgsi fare va takts passes trenton "ould oe
the most certain place A tor the juggling manwuyre
by considering tbs New Jersy Railroad aud frans
ytrtstiOn Company as exaotps part of the four dol
lars, that to aD idle ceu,iona empty trick OF names
ana iorms-vbich cannot stand bst"een the lag ana
It's victims.
s. Az sum, paid for the transportation of merchsn
dee, bsyond tue legal rates at any time within aix
years are nov recoverable back. This principle lies
b. yopd the of the constitutional obyscuOa; and
UpoB Ls point the Judges OF the Court Of Appeals we're
VI suiuous Th.se nsy be brought Ia the local
courts tf New oik and pbiadelphis, aud In the giF
cut torTt OF the United States and may be co@mencsd
by attachment q the comrany's propsrty rhts Prn
eivle sprIiss a. we 70 oves charges the canal 20
CyeIcsafg.s the rsilrosd The oyercharsss ON the
tai so during the last cir years estBafet Ht
seven hundred .tboussnd dollars II ought to BE- OBJ
sen.d that the rigbt 20 the peasty IL cumuisiTe
upon The right 20 recover back the excess paid shove
the legal rate. toth remedies may be pGrsuedto
geth.r.
IL being nov finally and conciusvey settled by the
unanimous opinion 81 sll the judges a Ne- Jsrsef,
that the compsnies have for years e1scisd illegal fares
tL,ir charters forfeit ia Lac. Tie only method
ho.s,er By which th forfeiture can be taken sdvan-
tsge Of 10 by preeesdpgs Ia quo wcrrrnio vbieh As.
coIdpg 70 the practice VI Nss Jersey bs iayttutd
otly W the Attorney u.sers stree ths dro','"n Ia
the attornsy General the supreme Joaft ior
witt ~ 1,o roytarfs.
W he n.glects ths duty the judges a. general sem
setyatcrs 1 Justice and guardians OF the ls~ nhovd
direct him TO msks sucb an application But the 80
gssture ought also. 10 move io the matter The le-
gaufs Ct New y.rsey o~es II the State, and 70 the
whole mmunity 20 pass forthyith sJelnt resolution,
insruoog the Attorney General 60 apply for writ OF
quo AZ the Legslsturs IL strongly anti mo-
nop.y ~ IL undsrstood that such resolution wil un.
dovbtsdiy be psse.d This portentcus corporation is
nos ompletsly Ia the hands Of the anti inongp.st
Whether you consider the matter 81 the flrietae OF
the charter or the immense accum uaton OF pecunsy
liabilities which 10 at preciptsed upon the com.
psny clear that the late decision ~ the Court oi
krrofs aud Appeals will Inevitably accom- P-h the total
ruin OF thit formids bis corporation. JUSTICE
NJ sFtr1so Tss.EorsrsIc raoohEss.-some experiment.
lfve bSep mad@ ct Norwicb, with q new appsfAtuf
vnSch by the description 10 be ,ither thst o
Mr. bsl.ris insspioss sstoerapho telegraph, Of tos
frediicscn o. the fsme principle. sixty letters we're
BY this means l.giby written In what we may fsisy
csli lorg hand, stretching from London % Norwieh
aud ~ expected that sben the invenuon ~ hAed Aud