The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-04-12
ANTI-RAPID TRANSIT.

\ PERMANENT EAST SIDE CHECK TO THE EAST
SIDE ELEVATED RAILRoAD-EUFUs sroRy's
INJUNCTION SUSTAINED BY JUDGE LARRE-
MORE.
1t will be seen by reference to Judge Larremore's
opinion ia the OF Rufus Story against the New
York Elevated Railroad Company, gwen below, that
the prospect OF an early completion OF tho east side
extension OF tho road is rather gloomy Mr. Story, as
will be remembered, obtained temporary injunction
restraining tho Elevated Railroad Company IRON pro-
eceding further with their structure on Front street,
opposite his premises. Ho charges IN his complaint
that tho Rapid Transit act, under which the company
claim the right build IL unconstitutional and void.
and that tho structure illegal Judge Larremorc, Ut
the Court Of Common Pleas gavo his decision yester-
day on the order TO show cause. cmbodyng Tho sane
IN the following broi opinion:-
OPINION or JUDGE LARREMoRE
BY tho act Of April %, 1857 lchap. 4S0) the West
Side and Yopkers Patent Railway Company was au-
thorzcd to elevated railway IN tho coun-
ties OF New York and Westchescr the constr ction
OF which. far comprised In the limits OF the city
Of Now York, was TO DO completed within i've years
from the passage of tho act The company failed to
construct tho road within the time prescribed. On
a. amended, took elect whereby tsectlon lsl the
Legislature was prohibited from passing local or pr
va,s Sii granting 70 any corporation assac,aon or
granting any private corporation, association or in
dvidual any exclusive privilege, immunity or fran
rights aud powers Of the West Side ana Yonkers Pa
tent Railway Company aud June IL 1875 an act To
authorize tho New York Elevated Railroad Company
10 continue and complete It's railroad IN tho city
III Now York, and 10 regulate tho construction,
operation and management thereof passed. by the
Legislature (Iaws 1916, chap. 505l wherein said
company authorized and required 10 construct
and complete track with turnouts and side tracks
OF IL elevated railroads at any time within i've years
after the passage OF the act. Tho General Term OF
this Court. In tho OF John Patton vs. Now York
Elevated Railroad Company, decided that the right 10
construct railway conferred by the net or April ~,
1857 expired IN 1885, that such rights and powers n5
had perfected and secured by the grantee named
said became eiiectual ns againat tho citizen,
and could only DO oKed al the sui OF tho State Tor
the forfeiture ol tho entire grant for the failure 10
pete the railroad within the time aud III the man
prcscrbeu but that thu powers aud privileges not
thus perfected aud were lost and any attempt
10 further carry them into effect 10 tho injury OF any
one would confer right OF action for such In
Jury u further decided that tho act
JuEs II, 1875, lar II assumed
ferred by tho act oi April ~ 1867, was Ia conflict with
tue provision oil tho constitution which prohibits tho
Legislature IRON passing any private Or local biil
granting 10 any corporatcn association or Individual
tho right 10 lay down railroad tracks This decision rs
conclusive upon the question as 70 the continuance OF
tho injunction liz tho Court holds, the
act OF June H. 1875, is unconstitutional the further
construction OF its railway by the defendants alter
1917, commonly known as the "Rapd Transit act,
could hot revive the forfeited franchise Tho dcicnd
ant had lost the right extend It's route SO as TO CO.
tncidc with tina. referred TO and intended by section
80 Of tho act last mentioned. IL not existing
elevated railway in ac'ua operation, having the hrst
right TO build upon such route then owned by u us
prescribed by the STATUTE This conclusion arrests the
necessity oil examining the other point, raised upon
the argument and VIII afford the defendant an early re-
view ol tho next General Term OF this Court. In
junction sustained