New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1866-08-02
SUPERIOR CoURT-sPECiAL TERN-AuGUsr before
JUICE McCUyS.
OUR CITY GAILPOADs-JUDGMRNr IN THEIR FAVOR
gurv Cu,pcr AxD COLLECT SIX CFNTS
THEY QHAReT AEp coLLE 8 r sIx Cents c

None, penry asL Tho sfrh.ave Railroad Company.
Opinion oyerrglipg demurrer of defendants: Mr.
Fl5rge Gerry fo Iaintin; Mr.. Hosson for defendant
BY the Cosrt-TAe first question Is whether the penal act
Of 1855 applies TO city railroads. incorporated under The
general act Of o bl, whose ,e ior nc S me ey
sGhores Who bestowed tbs grant. and which contract
has been r1ed by the Legislature OF s AN OF opinion
The act Of sJ refer. by its very only to companies
In Chase AIT New York Central Railroad Co. % N r.
G the Court says that the statute CT 1901 ha, reference 10
the statute which the for carrying passengers nxed
and allowed DO exceed two cents mile aud 1t has no
reference Whatever TO City railroads =.
the OF the shows that IL could not
have been intended to refer 70 companies whose fare was h1ed
OF certain for any distance great or small ,.n
asa and receive greater fare than that allowed By law to
wit TWO per mile and declares that It shall be lawful 10
take legal statutory fare for one mile Tor any fractional
distance less than q mile . ,
ness therefore OF the defendants the present
aci on by the mile and not BY their contract
with The City under which they have always received their
aie but ty the general Raroau Ae manifest ne ACT Oh
isJ; bias no application. - ,-.-,....,
Indeed question was never intended to apply TO
city railroad company who are carriers Of passengers on
and his manifest from the language Of the statute which
provides that every corporation formed anoer shs nave
power regulate the time and manner IN whieh
and property shall transported and compensation to be
paid therefor such compensation for any passenger and
It would be impossible to apply TO city railroad
Tie railroads Of the interior have stations a, h1ed poris
from and which the fare comparable and az waioh pas
;sS N Ell. es' AID do q al poa sa and
& 20 Th' c ne P Pcae ps may "a Us.
See 5as) ard may demand an extra fys een IRON pas.
also % s es sS fPs rS SS ans @ss
heir business "a depot nstance aud acquire the legal
tiis seailsi the w Of the owner % "a and 3a It's
clear therefore hat tie general Railroad Act Is not be
stretched beyond reasonable applications. Bat in addition
the operation ofs.c sc Of the general act.
The act Of 1854 applies exclusively 10 City railroads. which
s grant aaS S ec, 's and -
upon asS S @ S e e e. thereto
Now tLese defendants had scsay incorporated nearly
pat tisr roads They therefore within
It's and by its very erms they we're placed IN the
position which they would have been had they obtained
their the Common Council after the passage OF the
act aud in strict compliance with lie terms.
Bat while The act OK l5i ratified aud sanctioned tho agree
ment made between ilese defendants AID the Common Cour
ell ara thus took The subject out Of the General statute OF
$50 did rot make the FIRE fxet by that agreement mat
tel Of crfory enactment !. did not make the fare allowed
by law in thelnguge Of tue penal act Of ls y was sun
regulated - contract Tao act combining me eonrset
saws nothing hbog are leaves that as found and royided
for tie rolnons and contract between ne Sty ann ths
Company II made vatd, you please fodso.e colr nc
gave legislative sanction 10 all s provisions 'oa' OIL i0
oows from what has been said that the fare Of these
s by the act Of 1880 claimed by
~ Corrorstou and 1t equally follows that the act CT l.S7
10 these defendants therefore the penalties
Son t.ter by the sndsnts tho complaint in this That
IN no Cont does il sees that the plaintiff informed the con
ietST "a sT Da1 f hi, exception Is wen taken
b after what said above II is not necessary 70 discuss
the proposition. The demurrer ~ the delendspn answer
pust Therefore be oyeirued with COST
SUPREME COURr-SrEcrAL TrRn-AuG. Before Jus
tee DAvIs
DECISIONS.
Parker agt. Barrett. compliant dismissed tSee
written deoision.)
Before Justice BARNARD
HenEy l.. Browninget. al. agt Marx haTrison'-
Motions 10 order II arrest denied -. a,
Jno NJ. Wood, &c, agt. W. H. pyokman aud 0hsrs'-A''
paIfsth s. barney as President OF Wells FargO Co.
M Rnrete Lin1e 70 Bail reduced TO tSJVO