New-York tribune., 1870-12-13
THE BERGEN TUNNEL WAR

PROCEEDINGS IN THE UNITED STATES COURT Al
TRENToN-ERIE's CLAIMS.
The suits of the Erie Railway against the
| Delaware, Iackawanna and western Rahrcad Coin-
pany and the cross suit OF the latter Company were be-
gun Yesterday in Trenton before ChieJustice Beasey
sitting as Chancellor L. I. Green, Leo. Albeit Atty
GEN Gilchris and Senator Stockton appeared for the
Erie Company and Jacob Vanatta, Benjamin Wilkinson
and Cortland Perker the Delaware, Lackawanna and
Western Company. There are three suits pending:
First Erie Railway Company AGAINST Morris ana ~,
and Western Railroad Company calng Tor an account
second Erie Railway Company against the Delaware,
| Iackawanns and Western for Injunction against the
Boonton Branch road the ground that there never
bee constructed on lands owned by the Erie Railway
Company without any OF those lands hayhs 9een pee % PIr
road between the HudsoB River opposite lork anu
Paterson exclusively in the Erie Railway Company as
essees OF the Paterson and Hudson River Railroad.
Thhd: The Delaware. Lackawanns and Western Rail Rail
pany against the Erie Company and the Long DOCK con
pany asking for the appointment OF receiver 10 operate
the tunnel under reguons 70 Og and
Western Road the same right TO ITS 9ss use
The western Company claim in the third suit filed an
equal right OF way through the tunnel Win the Ero
o am assiment Of contract between the Long
Dock Company and the Hoboken Land and Improvement
Company, and that they may run al their business
| through the tunnel without charge.
On the 81 OF December ChefJustice Beasley issued an
Injunction against the Delaware Lackawanna and West
ern Railroad Cos and order TO show cause why the In
junction should not be granted. On December the lat
road fled cross BILL which came up nst OF the cases
yesterday before the Chief Justice.
The Erie Railway Company In answering the cross-b
OF the Delaware, Lackswannai and Western Railroad
in this suit the cOmplainants deny that anything
in the charter OF the Morris and Essex Railroad
| Company authorizes them TO cross-use or In
| terfere with the line Of any other railroad
in the ne
build tunnel for its own use. The Erie Railway Com
pany also denies that the Long Dock Company was at
any time unable through lack of means 10 complete the
fnInel or that for that purpose they called upon the
HobOken Land and Improvement company ior ASSIST
! tunnel was owing TO Observation-Disclosures between the
| Long Dock Company and the contractors.
II is denied that the road with which the Long DOCK
Company entered into contract concerning the tunnel
was ever more than partially built or that the Morris
! Delaware Lackawanna, and Western Railroad Com
mny, has any rights whatever TO the tunnel; me-,
in 1889 between the Long Dock and Hoboken Land ana
Improvement Companies II Is claimed that no contract
possible between these two companies could authorize
road yet at that time unbnit TO run through or use the
yousy entered int, by the Long Dock Company could in
any way affect then-the lessess OF the tunnel con
| stfyncted by the former Company.
The defendants claim that the only right OF way which
its lcssees can have through the TUNNEL Is
conferred 10y act VI Legislature In 1884, by which the
tunnel is made a highway on the payment of tolls and
that In c>e defendants being the constructors Of
such highway, have the right to regulate its use.
The defendants la the suit further assert that the in
roads greatly lnterferes with
the running Of trains upon both roads ana especially IN
trfrrcs with the traffic Of the Erie Railway COMPANY
The Delaware Ilrkawanna and Western Railroad claims
right its entire traffic into The tunnel The Erie
/ asserts that at present the conveyance Of that
! road il annually 100000 passengers and iOo-
tuns OF coal beside other freight " also asserts
that Drlaware, Iackawanna and western Railroad
and intends branches ana TO increase
- facilities la the carriage O double the number OF
srn,crs 3GDOO tuns Of coal for the conveyance Of
which latter article alone entirely road hOs been
rurted The defendants believe that n these in
tutions are carried and the business of the Efe
Road should continue ia prrrnt rate Of increase for two
years. two tunnels of the capacity OF the
IN use woud than suffice the transaction
! the business of the companies.
declares that tile traffic on hc two rads II al
great morning aud evening, when passenger
trains principally run, that delays are exceedingly
| frequent aud entirely unavoidable but at the
same time interfere greatly with the successful
| operation OF both roIds, besides causing great
annoy vance 10 the passengers. The defendants
also complain that the Boonton Branch
Railroad j. entirely distinct thing which conld
possibly have been included in agreements between
the Two roads and, moreover that fm Paterson Ia is
junction with the main line east Of the Hackeusarh
River, II II an Illegal structure They claim also thar hs
bridge the Ilackensack Ia buit without authority;
aud that the rad near It's Junction with the Morris ana
Essex CROSSES over the Lands of the Erie halfway 'o
pany, to which they have. ami can have, no rShi;
The Delaware, lockawanna and western I."iH"'"
Company ON the lat of December announced th'W IN
rntion or running passenger trains over the b"o'"h
Branch Ia BoOntOn and Paterson. -.
On saturday, jay Could sent letter 10 ri'siu'h'
Sloan informing him that any ationipi in run shh
trains would be prosecuted yoll"h ni 'hr hlunr
ton issued by the Chief Justice ,fA''r'sI huN''el.
the Chief Justice declared that the 'n'iio1 Was not
meant with the running :" Nsns az" lh"t
no such order would be is-iei.