The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-05-20
THE RAILROAD FERRIES.
Will They Have to Pay the City for
Their Privileges :?
OPINION OF GEORGE ylGKNOR CURTIS.
WHAT RAILWAY OFFICERS SAY.

In addition the present freight difficulties between
The lines OF railroads. creating such bitter rival
RIGS, another unexpected danger menaces tho giant
corporations which certainly has not been provided
for. The first intmaton of this grave additional
trouble given IN the Board OF Aldermen on
Thursday afternoon, When Corporation Counsel Will
lam G. Whitney presented communication from
Mr. George Tcknor Curtis in regard TO the necessary
legal steps be taken by the city TO have the Central
Railroad OF New Jersey enjoned TO abstain from the
further of the property or franchises OF the city,
Mt the of Liberty street. North River. and
move its structures sheds, &c, be sued Tor dam
ages for the trespass committed during number of
years. Mr. Whitney, in inclosing the communication
Board oil Nr. Curtis rehcarscd the fact that he
the Corporation Counsel-had been required, by a
resolution OF March and lS TO institute the necessary
legal steps not only to compel the Central Railroad OF
New Jersey respect the rights of city, but he
required in addition stop the transportation Of
railway passengers from the depot In the Twenty third
ward New York, 10 Jersey Guy. The questions in
VOWED momcntous that Mr. Whitney sought
the opinion. Of George Ticknor Curtis, which
fven and its conclusions Endorsed by the Corpora
non Counsel
CONSTITUTES FERRY?
Mr. Curtis, in lengthy and thorough manner. after
reviewing the resolutions OF the Common Council said
IN effect that the object institute inquiry into
the right OF the New Jersey Central Railroad Company
to exercise. from the loot Of Liberty street, North
River point in the State OF New Jersey, ferry
franchise, a franchise in the nature OF Terry, with
license from the corporation OF the city OF New
York and TO institute like inquiry into the right OF
company which has since the agc OF the resolu
tons, become known as the New England Transfer
Company ferry franchise, u franchise
Ia the nature Of ferry, from point IN the Twenty
third ward OF this city to point in jersey City,
a
New York.
IL viii be convenient to consider first the case of the
New England Transfer Company, because tho facts
capable OF distinct statement and because they pre-
sent the question in a pecu liar aspect understand
that the New England Transfer Company a corpora
ton organized under the laws of the State OF Connec
tcu 10 carry on The business OF transporting rassen-
gers and freight by the OF steamboats, upon the
navga5e waters of the United States that Tor tho pur
pose OF establishing new route iron Boston and New
England generally 10 the South and Southwest by
which passengers and freight may be carried to points
south and southwest Of the city OF New York without
being landed Manhattan Island, this transportation
company by an arrangement with the New York, New
Haven and Hartford Railroad Company, brings pas
sengers aud freight that railroad To It's depot In
Morisana now the Twenty-thrd ward OF this city alta
point on the Harlem River not Tar from its junction
with The East River; that the passengers ana freight
Maryland, the property OF tho New England Transfer
Company, which plies at regular and suitable Intervals
aud 10y regular trips between the place OF cmbarkation
nj Morrsanla and the company dock IN Jersey City,
where the pa ssengers and freight landed, making
water passage only between Morrisania aud Jersey
City; that being landed in Jersey City their further
transportation 10 the South or Southwest is continued
from that point; and that in like manner passengers
and freight coming IRON the South and Southwest
brought by regular trips OF the same steamboat FROM
Jersey City Morrisania for the continuation of tho
Journey TO the east and northeast Of this city. am
not informed that the transportation Company charges
\ distinct toll for the passage and transportation
on the steamboat nor do consider il material. l
will assume that the compensation OF the company
Tor the use OF the steamboat is included in con-
tract made for the carriage longer than
this water passage, and that distinct toll is taken in
respect 10 the steamboat also assume That the
fr.ta1 ,lxur
The steamboat each end OF the water passage and
of IRON the boat upon the respective railroads
which the Transfer Company has contracted to
carry them in continuation OF the journey
Assuming these to be the facts the first question to
be considered Is whether the New England Transfer
Company has established and is now running Jerry
between some point in the Twentythird ward OF this
ry and point in Jersey City and rersd,
nse the language OF the Common Council, whether the
said company is now running ferry?
Tho common law definition OF ferry is liberty, by
prescription or the kings grant, 10 have boat for
passage upon river for carriages horses for
reasonable toll The distinction of vessel that
used a icrryboat from one that is employed in gen.
eral commercial transportation, without being Jerry
boat in tho regularity and pcriodicy OF trips
between fixed points, Tor the purpose OF carrying pas
Eengers vehicles animals goods for compensation.
III boat is engaged IN general commercial transpora
tion without the regularity and purposes OF ferry trips
Il ferry boat II IL is engaged max ng regular
and periodical trips between liked points for tho
rage passengers, &C.. hirc engaged in the
business OF fcrrying. Nor is vessel is SO en-
poyed any the less ierryboat because Il is owned or
employed by railroad company or transportation
river for the purpose OF transporting its
passengers and freight across the intervening
water IL held by The Court OF Appeals in Aiken
VS.. The Western Railroad Corporation, 20 New York,
BIO, that grant by the Legislature to the Western
Railroad Corporation OF power TO connect the terminus
OF road the bank OF the Hudsou with depot
on The west bank. though u may by implication give
right 10 establish Jerry does not constitute such ferry
part of the railroad TO be operated under railroad
iranchise that the regular and constant transportation
of It's passengers, &c, by OF boat the
exercise OF ferry franchise, which could only be ex-
crcsed by the consent OF the Corporation OF Albany
having the control OF ferries; and that tho graiuious
carriage OF other not passengers OF the railroad
or in It's service equally the exercise of ferry
franchise where the carriage is done for toll
The reason on which this decision rests, although
not formally announced by the Court, Is that
The right TO have ferry has always been
reserved by the sovereign power TO be granted dis
and special privilege, account OF the that
the transportation involves an embarkaton upon tho
water and therefore the sovereign power those to
whom its authority is delegated, will exercise special
IN regard TO the persons TO whom the grant
be made A grant Of a right to have railroad with
terminus each bank of a river and a line extending
beyond each terminus, Is not grant OF Terry across
the river; but the ferry must DO obtained by specific
grant, which may be, OF in the charter;
but II without such specific grant the railroad com
pany establishes boat for the regular and periodic
transportation oil It's passengers across the river II Is
In tho exercise OF Terry franchise without sufficient
authority
boat Maryland, II employed by the New England Trans
fer Company in the manner above supposed rs ferry
boat and that the company is now exercising what
would be Terry franchise II II had obtained the ncces
sary authority Its transfer boat the waters
that lie between MOrrsania and Jersey CITY,
IL has been asked II this use OF the Maryland, above
supposed, constitutes II ierryboat why s not an
steamer, which plies regular and fixed inter-
walls IRON the city OF New York port In Europe,
carrying passengers and freight, ferry and why
are not steam vessels which ply from the city or
New York. regular aud fixed Intervals carrying pas
sengers and freight to fixed point either shore OF
Long Island Sound, outside OF the limits Of this city,
also ferry boatsg
In answer 10 this Mr. Curtis maintained that 1t is
sufficient TO that the highest judicial authority OF
the United States has decided that the right regulate
cen he upue m ppy
mcnt has always been by and never
by Congress- and OF part OF the OF cgated
powers reserved to the states respectively, and that
tho highest judicial authority OF the state has decided
that ascamboat employed by railroad to transport
passengers and freight from It's terminus one bank
OF river To It's depot another bank ferryboat