New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1853-02-23

MONDAY night Mr.. John =. Baker Real ,tate rent
was driving the Seventh sv and when about to turn
the corner OF Twenty ourth-st the horse took fryht
and dashed the wagon TO pieces Mr. Baker wa. thrown
violently upon the pavement and when picked up was
found to be insensble The Sixteenth Ward Police
conveyed him TO the Station house where he was at
TENDED by physician who subsequently advised his
being taken to the New York Hospital He was accord
incy removed TO that institution where he died early
yesterday morning. He remsned in a state of insens-
by up to the time Of his death and it was not known
to certainty till yesterday afternoon who be was
Coroner ODonnel held an inquest upon the body and
verdict Of death from injuries accidentally received
was rendered. Mr.. Baker was a native of this City,
about % years Of age and lived in Fourseenths
NiDth-av. He connected with the firm of Anthony
J. Blocker g. Co
BROADWAY RAILROAD Supreme Court -
Tuesday, FEB. 22-Before Judges EDWARDS, NORRIS
and STnoNG.-At the opening of the Court Judge Ed
WARDS, addressing Mr.. FIELD said he hoped that each
Counsel would limit himself to one day.
Mr.. FIELD said that he had no idea of occupying
more than one day This is a very grave question,
and the more there is a conflict between local
Court and the City Government Into this great
deal Of extraneous and exciting matter which he
would only refer TO for the purpose of doing away
with any bad feeling it might have given rise TO- the
plaintiffs the owners of the Broadway Railroad but
they only swear they believe it. when it should be made
to appear by positive proof and title with respect TO
the charges that the taxes have been raised to their
senthigh rate by the prouse expenditure and gross
elect and corruption Of the Common Council. This
they alege as their belief but they offer no proof
do they give one solitary instance Of such corruption
This was very loose swearing. They also that
Broadway lie ancient street. made humid red and
fifty years ago. When an injunction is sought there
must be proof of the right Of the parties applying posi-
tive and not nerentia belief and also Of the in
jury the act to be prevented would infct otherwise
injunction could well be issued on a blank sheet of
paper and persons would be bound to obey The first
point that the Corporation has the power under the
charter and subsequent statutes TO allow railroad
to be laid down in Broadway, and has always exercised
that power in laying out carriage sidewalks, &c. &c
and, in the of the Second Third, Sixth and Eighth
av Railroads and the statutes granted this power Of
laying out streets and repairing and also give power to
establish, which word establish gave the Corporation the
whole authority TO change and do any other act they
might think proper and quoted an opinion Of Chancel
lor Kent this subject, that corporate DO ieg had
the absolute and entire control Of the public ways in the
City, II is folly TO contend that the Corporation have
only the power the surface of the street for
how them could they direct water and gas pipes to be
laid down taken up: and these works, while going
would be obstruction to the passage way; and the
Corporation gave permission 10 persons TO dig under
the streets for the purpose OF making cears and no
person could do without liberty, and paying certain
for that liberty and to its being said that this
only because OF the pavements being disturbed but
this could not be the case the cellar could be dug
without disturbing any pavement as in the case OF
the Thames Tunnel With respect TO the nuisance
in the street He instanced the Hudson River abroad
which but three feet and half from the sidewalk,
while the Broadway road would be more than twelve
feetand quoted the opinion OF the presiding Judge in
the of Drake against the Hudson River Railroad
Company that ii hitherto the received opinion
that the nghtto the property and fee In the land resided
in the Corporation" Counsel contended that under the
Colonial Government the ownership OF the streets was
vested in the Crown and this ownership at the time OF
Independence from the Crown paseed TO the state,
end from the State TO the Corporation to be used as be-
the adjoining lots had right to the way than the
free Of IT, which right enjoyed by them only
equally with others and II was only after damage was
done or distractions made that a remedy could be
sought it only these grounds relief cont be
sought He contended and quoted authorities to prove
that railroad per sc was not nuisance anessn could
be proved that the ordinary uses for which II was dedl-
Gated az a street. inertered WITH and he quoted
the opinion Of Judge Edwards on the case OF
Drake and the Hudson River Railroad, where he
stated that he did know If the Court would be ust
fed in interfering the instance of private individual
10 put an end any obstruction In the streets whch
the Corporation Of the City had passed unnOtced The
New York in case the Corporation assented aud that
was leaving the entire authority with the Corporation
for otherwise when the Legislature gave the Cmpany
power az Corporation they could not give them power
10 come into the City unless the authority was vested IN
the City of NewYork. Counsel went on to contend,
and quoted authorities to prove that the primary OBJECT
of street 10 give convenience TO the pnoc-tat
If this idea was carried out whether by making new
surface or by tunnelg and excavations and that even
when the streets repairing the persons In that
neighborhoOd put to great Inconvenience, uut sun
when IL to promote the original object, no IN iter
wha, the inconvenience may he TO particular persons
and that the construction of Railroad not Tor the
exclusive of perron and that the k4iroa1 car
was no obstruction the street than any other
vehicle the running OF which was regulated by tae Cor,
poraiiop in ahom rested the power OF removing all
nusaDceE.
Judge MoRRrs-By what power are telegraph posts
allowed 10 be put down in the streets :
Mr. FIELD-We will come 10 that soon, ana then II
will be seen that there is immensely VI property In
NewYork the title TO which, Il the ownership OF the
land does not rect in the Corporation, not worta
single cent Counsel quoted Judge Strongs OPINION
from wspspcr report, OF the trial OF John hentl
agansi the Long leland Railroad Company, for damages
for the incony enience 10 him IN running the Railroad IN
front of his house but the Judge decided that the run
ming track through village was no nuisance ana
instanced the OF Utica, Syracuse and other lace
He quoted Radcliffe, against the Mayor OF Brooklyn
where II laid down that no person was enutet TO
compensation for the land over which rail rsck ran
unless the land directly taken from them. 10
prove that the Corporation had the right to the land
in fee and exercised that right he read the affidavit OF
Turner and others the right OF excavations hal been
bought b. persons in Broadway and read charter from
the English Government in l6S6, granted all powerin
the lanes street, ses in the Island OF Manhattan TO the
Corporation Of New.YOrk, which before were royalties
snd belonged absolutely to the Crown, at which time
the eity only extended as far Is Maiden Lane and all
hcyond thai belonged 10 the Government. He caleb
attention TO the of the Legislature OF 1893 confirm
ing all previous grants IL not meant that the Cor
poraton had the fee absolutely tina, they could
N - tnr
but that the ownership of the land for the public uses
and the benefit OF the citizens is vested in the and
quoted the acts Of the Legislature giving power to the
Corporation the fee of all land In Tor tbs
uses Of public ways be used tor the benefit OF
the public in the way other streets. lanes anl
high ways used and OF right ought be used in the
City Of New. York.
The Corporation having then the power, was law
fully exercised in this grant OF permission TO lay down
railroad in Broadwsy and permission the same as
was granted 70 lay down posts % Tecgraph Compa