The New York herald., 1870-01-30
THE GREAT BORE FIGHT.
The Pneumatic Transit Company Litigation
Continuation Of the Arguments-The City
Upon Its Dignity-The Question Of In
fringement Of Territorial RiGhts.

Hostlities were resumed in the Supreme Court
Chambers yesterday morning before Judge Cardozo.
The very inauspicous condition OF the weather did
not deter large crowd OF persons from peing pres
ent in the court roOm the proceedings being some
what Of an important and interesting character.
Serious questions were involved and the legal dis.
cussion Of the matter was anxiously listened to.
on the previous evening the counsel for the defen-
dants had concluded his argument contending that
the corporation OF this city was entirely subordinate
to the Stale Legislature and had substantial tile
70 the fee Of the ground which was being burr owed
by the company for the purpose OF laying the pneu
matte tubes.
Mr.. Sullivan in behalf OF the city, submitted that
there was q contract with the adjacent owners for
the use OF the streets with thc full authority OF the
Legislature. Moreover he contended that Whatever
might be the authority Of the Legislature to take
away the charter interfere with the political
rights Of the city, the contract Itself was merely
transferred to the State and the State was bound
bylt.
Mr. Richard O'Gorman, Counsel to the cornora.
tlon following on the same side, c,sifned that the
Darlington case cited and re.iod upon by the other
side had been decided IL time Of great public ex-
that the eat9 city Of New YORK should be punished
THAT feeling had even extended itself into judicial
decisions. II anything that decision clearly meant
to convey tnat the city had rights at all; but In
the rendition OF that judgment one Judge dissented
| and 1t was not by any means improbable that the
decision would yet remain and the other be swept
away. The Kerr case too mad been strongly relied
upon by the other sde The opinion In that was
eighteen pages long, and although tnat might form
| party to It, Counsel further contended that that
could not make the question res dtudcdtd as far as
the city concerned. Now, II the defendants were
right their operations WHY not dig their bores at
once instead OF going to the Legislature. Plainly
the was that they wished to avoid the action
tresspass that the city a. the legitimate owner would
have against them. Supposing this excavation would
son injured BY It would recover from the city, as
owner for negligence on the part Of their officials.
The title to all the claimed by the city was
conveyed Dy the ACT or l799 and the act OF 1913 d
| rected that property OF the city taken for
| streets should Do paid for III the same manner
a. If taken nom other proprietors Of pro-
| perry. The city. he contended, merely claimed
the rights OF other propretors In the streets by the
act OF 1913 the city was permitted to cOse out the
trust on paying damages to the adjacent owners ant
| obtain the absolute lee, which was another proc
or the cty's property In the streets. The question
between municipalities and the central power was
1 very old one II ruined King James In England
| and tradition Itself was largely In their favor
| The question OF the right to use would pro
badly come up before the courts In many ways be
fore long The plans Of underground railroad dit
not seem inconsistent with the proper use OF the
street. and II the Legislature took similar view ht
asked the court would not this pneumatic line inter
fcre with It's progress. After reviewing the facts
It, Mr. O'0orman concluded his argument BY con
tending that the INJUNCTION prayed for In the com
plant should ~ granted. The Court reserved dc
cisien.