The New York herald., 1874-11-11
CITY COURT-PART /.

The Middle village and North Second
Street Railroad Litigation-The Dam
gerous Switch at the Foot OF South
Seventh street Not TO be Replaced.
Before Judge Nelson.
In the case OF the North Second Street and Mid
die Village Railroad Company against the City OF
Brooklyn Judge Nelson rendered his decision yes
terday. The suit came up in the form OF an appli.
caron to continue a preliminary Injunction re.
straining the city from interfering with the plain
tlfrs IN relaying or restoring turnout or siding
formerly used by them. The terminus o. the road is
at the ferry foot Of South Seventh street. ana the
contention is as to the precise point north south
OF that street at which the turnout siding should
be placed. That which Is sought to be restored
constructed in 1866, on the west side OF First,
between South Seventh and South Eighth streets,
where piaintlns' cars pass rom and to the track
oil another railroad company. 1t is set forth in the
complaint that "the point at which said turn
table, turnout or switch was situated Is at the
trance OF the Jerry; That there Is gate there
through which passengers and vehicles pass and
repass to and from the ferry boats" The plain
tins claim that the turnout or siding was thus
located with tine proper consent and authority
and should still be maintained as necessary to
their business; and that the act OF defendants in
removing tue same was an improper ana un-
authorized interference.
on the part or the city it is shown that the turn
out was not thus located for the accommodation
OF passengers, as that gate was not cOnstruc ted
until after the siding had been placed and in use;
C0dt Tue cars Cu LNc JuTuOUL lubcTfeTe VIII ana
hinder the vehicles using that gateway and that
III running TO and from that point the cars pass
the principal entrance to the terry and delay and
discommode the passengers. The pressure and
interruption mas been regarded so great at THIS
point, where very many passengers come and 60,
that such use by the cars has been dangerous 70
the people and nuisance. In deciding the appn-
cation tue Court nods the opinion that the plain
titfs have not such apLar right TO be restored
to the use OF the turnout siding at the ferry gate
as to justify granting an order protecting them
from the interference or the defendants. The PLAIN
tins rights were granted to them by the Legsla-
ture and the municipal authorities have not the
power TO impair those rights. They may run their
cars TO and from the Terry at the foot OF South
Seventh street. Those words 10 bc under
stood as giving them leave 70 come as near 70 the
Terry as may be necessary, convenient anu reason
able. they are not permitted TO bring their cars
In and upon and across the street ard occupy any
position IN 1t. Their business lies north 0i that
street. When their cars reach the north side OF
IL they are at that street and at the erry-that is,
sufficiently near TO the Terry 10 answer the prac-
tical purpose OF meeting the wants OF. passengers
and securing their custom 1t seems to the Court
that business and travel upon this ferry are so
great that IL would he improper to nave the space
street, where there a railroad track blocked up
by any permanent arrangement Tor standing cars
or for their use. To maintain such an arrange
DenJ would be prejudlcial TO the PUBIC, pcrver-
sion OF the street to au lnproper use, and, there
fore, inequitaDe. The city authorities have q
right 10 intervene to prevent tnat misuse and
should not be restrained in their efforts to so
order and arrange matters as TO trouble the PLAIN
tins IN a substantial aud reasonable degree, and
at the same time TO give facility and security to
the pubic travel and business. The application Is
denied