The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1860-09-20

delphia and Reading Railroad for the month of
August, $780, compared with the SAME month in
1852
Received from cesl..."....scsoo7 3 y l7a,s5l o.
Merchandise ..'.'''....'.'. 100 50 si.ss %
Total. 1857 Asl - 2ii, e0S %
Transportation. roadway, dump.
age, renewal fund, and al
other charges. l47,SoS % i26,sso "a
Profit FOR previous months sTs,l0i IS 1865 os
Total ne. profit for moe 81 oso s2s 10 $50 ,ses IS
We subjoir the answer of the New York Central
Railroad Company to tho suit brought against them
by Attorney General Myers for back tolls, on the
basis Of the pretended unconstitutionaIty of the
act of l85l:--
srPxEnE ccrRI-rhe People Of the State Of New York
Vs. the New York Central Railroad Company.
Frst-Tne defendant, answering the complaint OF tho
plaintiff Ia shc action above entitled denies tho de-
oct Of the issss.urs essd ian act 70 authorize Inc
formation OF railroad corporations and TO regulate the
same" passed April 2, 1850, referred 70 In said
The defendant, further answering, denies each AID
every allegation in said complaint, Ia regard TO tolls
feyred 10 In said complaint forming, bec5mng, or being
. part Of the revenues Of the state canals
And the said defendant answering denies that
Nav q Of sS
ton, derived and arose from freighn appurtensnt
and belonging 70 the said canals as alleged in the sat
And defendant further answering denies that there
s no other mode BY which the said freigh, could or
canals, a. 10 alleged In said complains And the de-
PENDANT sage ,ha without said canals and railroad very
ported by oer modes and through other
OF which have been made and opened By the authority
and aid Of the plaintiff by which large amounts OF trade
railroad.
The defendant further answering, denies that the
Syracuse aud Utica Railroad Company required by
s charter 70 pay tolls into the canal nd the
allegations IN said complaint stating that said several
the said act, passed May 4, 1874, and carried and
Transported large quantities OF freight ard paid into the
S 81 bs U s o ssa ss
formation sufficient I, form belief az TO said allegations
or any Or either q them, or any part thereof.
every allegation IN said complaint alleging the rail-
road companies referred In said complaint any
subject BY aw 70 the payment Of canal tolls aud said Do.
PENDANT further denies that such tos
seocnd--Ana for second and further defence the de-
PENDANT urther answering sayr that the OF action
mentioned In said complaint, % far % u embraces
raj railroad companies consolidated into the corporation
defendant and also TO large portion Of the claim for
sodssion did not nor did any part isreo; accrue with
six years next before the commencement OF this
ton and the defendant. says that 81 TIA, part q se
neni Of this action barred by the rA.uie Of limisa
tons
Thrd-And for . third and further asfence, the de-
fendant further answering says that on tie 10th day OF
ed Z, =, ,nsea act 10 sSo,h Lois o. r.ro.ss
that the question the dna passage Of said act In cash
house 0, sad Legislature was taken BY ayes and noes
which duly entered on the journals thereof, aud
three Ghs o. all The members elected either house Of
said legislature present a. the passage q sAA
In such house and voted for The same.
That said act was duly approved and signed BY the
Governor Of said STATE, and ever since has eeen and
now valid Law OF said state that said act provided that
this pay any OF money into the treasury Of
this State account Of the transportation Of property
any railroad after December L. 1851, 70 mako
70 the Com ptroller moathy statements Of the property
carried It's railroad and said repealed all and
parts Of acts requiring the payment Of STATE tolls by any
railroad company for the transportation OF property
any railroad alter said nrst day Of December far ~
they conflict with sad act and the defendant says thai
this acton was commenced and prosecuted without the
authority o. the plsintih
Fourt6-And Cor fourth and further defence, the d.
n.s :sa s !. q
10 In said complaint and AL other acts Of the Legislators
requiring the ment or state tolls by any railroad
void for the reason that they are = coscs via sections
and 10 OF article OF the constitution OF the United
states and the sys that the power 70 alter
vas reserved therein respectively.
Fifib-And for Gfih and farther defence the desud.
1850 The legislature o. s staie IN dne form passed an
oct entitled An oct to authorize the usBs oowtston OF
tolls y BY which enacted that scm cattle horses,
sheep and PORK meat might after The passage o. sad Set
be transported upon any railroad 10 this state without
ssms ,hoais ,sse sec, in which scs from me
day OF It's passage, has been and d yet valid las Of this
state.
The Defendant. further snswsriuz .sys that ia the
years 1858 and 1854 The pastf amended the state
stuton By providing subsiute Tor section three OF
article seven Of said consttuto BY which substitute the
plaintiff among other things Authorised The Canal Board
With the concurrence OF The Legislature, 70 reduce the
ion Whereby The pIsnis r.ttaci the ssd acss Of the
eos isture ~ April TO- 1850, and July 10. 1881.
The defendant further answering, says thai since the
ANA n erd with the Of The legislature has
educeS he rates Of tolls on property transported 90
=, state ans the psn ceers and .ssn,. have
berws M appropriated, diverted and sGuaadered said
erenues aud 10 the allegation ia sAii complaint that the
,sse cansis A. anshed snd that the state debt
40 The aefeu, ,ant upon Information and belief
ha but FOR such reduction diversion, transportation
nd s;ssS d 'a csp."sn soaa
ave been fuIaei sLc hs state canals would have been
rSs Ascendant, rurt or answering says ina, the rates
n t,s tor nv ira vpottei the state canals
zen changed by the authority Of the panti
n.e the p.sssss o. The e 10, 'c y, y ~ n.
srd Of ssid act Il MAY sts aud BY section cfssd
fs5d have never n aay vsy Tsce said act Of JAY
lo 1881 until May e. 1850, ma any rule o. regulation
Or direction required by sec, va said Ac' Of Nay
The Ssrcpdan, further ans~s !nr says that, re-
ia 1ssi the defendant sccepsed hs charter and
bas CONTRACTED large obligations for rnicn ~ eoaas
are now Outstanding unpaid and lNs ehNseo sna
compensation Cor carrying trpsru 20 ~
railroad (shich compensation has beer iss ,nan
would have been N sld act o. July W, ise4, hs1
been passed) and has issucd scrp for ss
ssockholdsrs relying upon The validity o. TIE 80 a
July 10, 1851 49,
The defendant, further answering, says y ~ s.Aer
iamaees 70 large amount said lac of July TO- Bsl
declared void, and the defendant claims and lnst' That