New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1853-02-01
COURT OF COMMON PLEAs-SPecrAL Tfxx-Be.
fore Judge WOODBURY..


Michael Kelly ACT the Mayer Aldermen, &c OF New.fors
Application for Injunction 20 restrain the
Cor Grafton from enforcing dinance passed 2th Ap1L
i relating 20 the removal oha bones snd other refuse
substances from the City. IL thar p,aiutif has been
eStt Dsyey engaged in the lawful business OF purchasing
and rtmosng from the City bones hoois horns &C. for
manufacturing purposes and also 20 them iB'o a
ma charcoal and hst the amount paid b. himself aud 9th
ers engaged IN the business amounts 70 Sooo year and
the prucseds OF their ses 70 s2pO that the resolution
authorizes the Cry Inspector 20 contract with Nlan ~
ReynCcs for the removal beyond the City Of the blood
0ss and other refuse matters um the slaughter houses
that said Reynolds Is engaged IN same business With plain
inf aud aims exclusive risht merchalttbe
boUes asw and thar they should be delivered
m sseomns under the ordr euee and THAT said Reynolds
has caused suits 10 be brought in the OF the Corp
ton against plaintiff and othes which have been decided
asalust the Corporation yet the suits are continued &c.
TIE Court gave an opinion o. considerable length, AID
did rot consider for reasons stated that the psiaf
entitled 20 inIuI etop.
The opinion concludes as follows:
The Of the defendants and the affidavit OF the
City nsI show the most mporlOce TO the
health Of The City that the collection and trans p0raon OF
bstancs through should be conducted under
the stringent precautionary guards yinst sants
WI oh might infect fho atmosphere and promote diseases
and perceive 66culty in prescribing such regulations
uelne the amer OF removal aud the DESCRIPTION OF We
hc 10 be used tor that purpose and the particular docks
winch shall be especially and solely used BY vessels eu
ssged IN the business and even requiring IN se who shan
Stances employ nen for hire 70 do undef license
to be granted for ha purpose in tn exercise Of discretion
20 suitable persons whose duty shall be- receiving such
license To transport such substances for all persons who
may dtsiIe IT, on payment OF reasonable compensation
therefor.
But tins is far short Of investing single individual with
Gle lie rover of removing such substances from the city
IN such wise that person else transport their
PROF ery procure TO be transported by him wthou,
giving it to hin his property aud without compcn
SETON
am reluctant to believe that the ordinance intend
ed embrace any other substances than such refuse
in the proper OF the term that H. abandoned rs OF
value given mp by the owners, o former owners,
dse As TO such substances che ordinance
be wholly free from objection
Neither the plaintiff any else igbt
10 about oyxety 10 collect and carry away such things
They prdy under the eootrol Of the public author.
ites who may and ought TO- provide for their removal
aid give such directions and make such contracts in res
ton there IN thru discretion for the public good
But without pressing settled opinion upon tbs lie.
gaty construction of the ordinance referred TO- suf
fciebt say that this motion must DO denied upon the
other grounds mentioned with the costs Of the motion