New-York tribune., 1876-07-01
THE COURIS.
TWO SUITS AGAINST RAPID TRANSIT.

lNO SUklo hpAlNSi hhI IL iAhNpii'
THE NEw-Yo iK ELEVATED RAILROAD DEFENDANT
~ Boru-GroUNDS oP THE PROCEEDINGS
The New-York Elevated Railway Company,
WIS defending its rights stcIday before The courts.
In the saDrto Curt Spectral Term before Judgr se,g
wick the comparatively sui of Tmothy Gallagher
against the NrwYork Elevated Railway Company MAS pre-
sentrd ex,Judg Frr.'lnan. demanding prohibition
against tile Of the dummy engine. The plainrih
Is the owner Of a house and lot Green weii-
St. bsiweeu North Moore anl Bca,c-st-.,
aud he sub autay admits that the Elevated Railway IL
lawful hut he declares that only Law authorizing II
l. law requiring Of wrr rops for traction vi
siatiouary enguss and tha TIE chang to dummy cit
gine- OF law aut Is nuisance. One
Of a avi- his behalf is made nv Clarlcs l.
Harvey Of the system, of endless rope tlc
tinu on winch Gre'nwiebsL road was originally
planned declares taat he has overcome all "bjec-
tiuns To hts ~ ystein.
The plaintiff Ia this case claims the act 81 1868. TO
the ext that l- essential change In the act
Of MI wns unconstitutional aud only valid IN 80
carried ont the a. Ter pct slso. that the hc' OF
lS7a wholly unconstitutional The arguments were
sinIar to preferred IN the Gilbert Elevated Rail
way suit. aud reed largely the decision ~ the Court
Of Common T ,,- iu the Pat,n suit. EI-Jndse Em"ti
answered claiming that the whole slt oe"nei rather ~
the intIr. of the inventor. whose In seDlous plans had
eced sttrr trial, than IN the teIesi o ic PAIN
tin slnre lot happened 70 nc f1ning oD the rail-
n,d lie drcIir,i III Il Tie act Of 1868 was not 10
,S,il'd by the plapth aud without the act
engine; he then examined and criticised At hnIth-
L. ronr extent tr HrgUnent~ made by him on
Tau -dAy IN thu Ninth Avennc. Cilnpanyr Nnt-tir
decision OF Cnmmuu PirI- IN the Pa ten suit claim
ing thai that dccsiuu dir-rt ron1irt wh the dr
rsn ~ the Supreme Court, General Te1n IN hr kipl
TrHusit act In rg'rd 81 the Cnnniss "ncr>, IN y
Il cisiuu uf the Unite States Circuit Court IN rctn
case ard even ssfaurd tu certain Hrct,ons i~hriug
IN ihe ca- did ut make the whole nct lnco ~ti
tutioI snh rlniy not the portions o the acc hiIh"F-
locomotives IN place ui stationary eh-
clprs The reserved IT. d''cisi "a
Iu the ,ut ~ tuf Sluth Aycunr Kailrbaf Company
against the New.York Elevated Ru.rva Compnuy.
which has b.en "u uial ior weeks before ia "
Van fIuci,Ii IN Common Pleas, sprsial Cerp, r \.
tngs ru,l H. arEuinrbt the horse railroad coin-
pauS yrsi-rl IS aud TIE was slbutt"i 10 Va, C"uT
Mr. Is ng- tn-l thai the plaintiff Comtny bad vSt'd
nights In the street th wuicu II pIsS'i Iru eel
vatpst constitutional prot ctiou q" cnii-
tracts aud 81 private right. IL cti ni that the ocr
don i the Eryale ruah IA all lie at> AZ hNSs ou
Of to-- rghfr. direct and p-tse injury
the plaintiffs. aud ailn ig Ia deprivation {" prop
rrt, liz rl.Icd c--'nit j y the pn.ui.ns
the position Jonu Patien. and tAai the Coufi-
dcsu i,r T. tt.n required itispn ID the paiutins =
favor lie az giIrd gTrat tngth Ht the tcr under
mich the Irvatrd Railroad Company ella med the righ
fo .r,te tn ~ ~ al Unconstitutional, not III rlV
"a Lus private rgits. bat as dlt1nhtng Ia cVAle
u, uv!sonS o the state Constitution hmtias legislative
pJwers The Court reserved lts decisiOh