The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-03-08
TnK BROADWAY RAILROAD CASE
rsaR Tur ASSEMBLY G0mITTxE.

-. dawn Ia the House by which 1t had been re
referred to this committed
a. Id % scml setasice in De etabiA'a3 Of Raiis0ay'
az he cities Of this STATE
n. peopIs OF State OF New York, represented in
Svpate and Assembly do enact as follows
sAsn mot construct nor authorize the construction of
RAILWAYS through upon the whole or any portion Of
An begin and end in said city shal any such rail
way be authority derived or TO be derived
sn them until ,revoas iss Of 5ns
ons under the atty charter aAd the laws Of this STATE
upon which city railways may be constructed
Seoton 2. II any person. company corporation shall
semuence continue the construction of any such rail
vay without previous compliance with the drst section
a this act shall be the duty ofthe Attorney General to
bring an action Of the people Of this State in
the Court against such person. company corpo
tion as the usurpers Of franchise and apply to said
eo.rt or Judge thereof IN for an order for an
junction thereon and prosecute said action to judg'
nent according to the course snd Of said court
Nothing in this section contained shall be deemed to
aperseSe impair any individual rights or remedies for
Il unau thor.ed construction of such railway.
Section Nothing in this act contained shall be con-
srued to apply to any railway track tracks already
ssustruetsd and IN operation within the units Oh SAID
Section This act shall take effect Immediately.
- FIELDS ARGUMENT AGAINST THE PROPOSED BILL.
Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the Committee
The origin of this bill is the opposition to the Broad
way Railway, which it Is said is an unwise measure,
Mdopted on unpopular grounds This involves two
ouestions- whether the reason has any founda-
Aon in fact; and secondly, if it have whether it be
q sufficient reason for the interference Of the Legis-
hture. i shall proceed to examine these questions
h the reverse order, first endeavorng to show-cven
all that is alleged respecting the Broadway Rail
road were true-that still it would not Justify the
passage Of this bill. Therefore, assuming for the
present, for the sake Of the argument that the
by no means as matter Of fact concede and which
shall endeavor to show by and by are without foun-
dation-I undertake to examine the question Of the
interference Of the Legislature first as question
If rlnhf md than nf yNn1tn
question of right then is it certain that the Legsla
tare, SO far the city Of New York is concerned,
has authority TO pass this bill without the consent Of
fhe citizens of New York, regularly obtainedl In
respect TO the question Of right, the argument is
this:-The fee of the streets OF New York, Broadway
included is in the corporation of the city, subject to
certain truss, which trusts are defined. Is it compe
tent for the Legislature to change these trusts with
out the consent Of the trustees and the beneficial
nesthat is, without the consent Of the corporation
and the citizens? l do not purpose to go mi
nutely into the argument respecting the own
crship Of the streets. | refer you to the orgi-
nal charter, to the subsequent charter of Mont
gomerie, and to the exposition of the law and
and fact contained in the communication from Mr..
Hoffman, which, think, are sufficient to satisfy any
one that the fee of the streets Is in the corporation
It is perfectly certain that all that part Of Broad
way which was opened under the Dutch government
belonged to the sovereign power at that time, and
passed with the government, to the English crown,
and from the to the State, at the Revolution
and from the State to the corporation by the act of
1898. 1t is equally certain that all that part of
Broadway which lies above Ann street is vested in
the corporation in fee under the act of 1913. And
rs to the intermediate portion it seems to be salts
factorly shown that the street either laid out
over public land or coded to the corporation. If
mis- be 80 submit to you whether you can change
the trust Of the streets without the consent of those
interested; and therefore whether as matter Of con-
stutiona right the Legislature has power to pass this
bill Passing from this now come to the part OF the
case on which ! lay greater stress, and which ap-
pears to me decisive and that u.s. taking for granted
that the Legislature has the right still it ought not to
interfere, as proposed by this bill. Here let ask
who it is that asks for this law, and upon what
grounds9 They are owners Of property on Broad
right to dictate the use of the street deny that
they have any such right. / deny that they who
happen to own lots upon street have controlling
voice in deciding how that street is to be used for
The purposes OF travel or traffic. The question be-
longs to the whole body OF citizens l do not know
how many persons there are who own lots on Broad
way but 1t il extravagant to say that they shall regu
guate the manner of that vast amount of travel which
daily flows and reows through it, much it would
be for the owners Of the banks Of your Hudson
my what class OF steamers, what kind Of smaller
craft, should navigate its waters The streets belong,
not TO the adjacent propretors, but to the whole pub
hc, whose convenience alone is to be consulted
whose voice alone is to be heard in their manage
ment Every law which goes upon the idea that the
landlord, rather than the traveller, may dictate the
nse OF public street, rests upon faacy The case
before US is as good an example as can be given
The South ferry is one OF the chief nlets, and it
were, gate of the city; people who come in there
from Long Island and Staten Island may wish to
pass through Broadway to the upper parts OF New
York, the inhabitants Of these upper parts may wish
to 60 down and cross over TO the adjacent island;
ese two classes OF persons have an interest in get
Ting carried cheapest and quickest through Broadway
Shall the landlords who own lots this street be
permitted to interfere with their convenience their
choice Of the mode Of travel? The form of our island
makes this question Of peculiar importance to Us.
Il is long and narrow and the inhabitants Of its ex
tremites shall not, nor viii not, be subject, in any
particular, to those who hold land on intermediate
streets. They may have as much voice in settling
the matters of public conveyances through those
streets other citizens, bat they shall not have
particle more.
Our Second avenue, Just opened and regulated for
which the city has paid from two hundred to two
hundred and fifty thousand dollars, runs through
marshy ground for portion its length. | am told
that the lots assessed five ten dollars for the
making of this road, and that the city paid at the
rate of one or two hundred; yet, according to the
doctrines of these gentlemen the owners Of the lots
GhAll dictate to the city government how the avenue
shall be paved and how it shall be used Can any
thing be more unjust The people Of the city Of
New York have the control over Broadway, and if it
be for the public convenience that railroad should
be laid there, the adjoining proprietors have no
Just right to prevent itthat is for the p5s autho-
rity TO decide. Gentlemen, how many owners of
real estate do you suppose there in the city Of
New York; | am informed by a person who ought
70 KNOW mat lnere are from twenty 10 twenty-five
thousand. How many inhabitant are there? About
six hundred thousand So that there is one landlord
to twenty four tenants
Which shall govern, the landlords or the tenants?
Shall this twenty-five thousand dictate what kind Of
public conveyance the six hundred thousand are to
use? This, presume, cannot be maintained in reason
or in law. But gentlemen, ought the Legislature Of
New York to interfere in the matter between the cor
poration of New York and the owners OF property
On Broadway, as proposed by this bill? Why should
they interferef The only ground alleged is that the
Common Council is so corrupt as no longer to be a
safe depository of the power TO regulate the streets
This argument proves too much. If the Common
Council OF the city of New York be not a safe de-
pository Of power, then, instead Of limiting your
operations to bills respecting railroads, you ought to
take from il all power There other interests OF
immense importance over which the corporate autho-
rites are still TO retain control Why do you not
take these away' This IS not proposed. But, gen
flemen, what are the facts? Far be it from me to
palate any misconduct proved, or charged, on eyi-