New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-09-28
THE COURTS.
RAPID TRANSIT.
NEW PHASE or TuE LITIGATION.


In the suit of the Sixth Avenue Railroad
Company against the Gilbert Elevated Railway Com
papy Judge sedgwick, in Superior Court Special Term
Lod that tho rapid transit unconstitutional and
that the sixth Avenue Company rad such special inter
prevent the building OF the rapid transit road as
TO give 1t right TO bring suit The Court OF Appeals
On proceedings outside OF this SUIT decided that tho rapid
transit constitutional Amoton was msdeye r
day Judge Van Worst IN superior Special Term to
stay all proceedings the Judgment Of Judge sedgwck
until the appeal heard. O.. r. Lowrey, IN presenting
the motion behalf OF the Rapid Transit Company,
avowcd frankly that the motion in substance, TO
permit the building Of the Gilbert Elevated Railway IN
sixthave, during the time which must intervene before
the General Term could announce It's declson WlthOht
interference by motions to punsh Tor contempt
Joseph H. Choate In reply, read an affidavit OF r. y
Butler, the President Of the Sixth Avenue Rnllroad
Company. The point OF the argument u that WINE ne
Court OF Appeals Dy divided vote OF four To three
decided that the rapid transit act was CONSTITUTIONAL Tue
four rested their conclusion on Interpretation or ths
act that II provided for payment OF private INJURIES
while the three thought no such proyisIo was MADE,
and without 1t tine act was unconstitutional ASIDE
from al tins, the plaintiffs rights admitting mat tasy
were doubtful. should br projected Acc0iuihg 20 ue
statements suit by Dr. Gilbert against the company,
the directors Of the company or some OF them had ored
the New-Horh Loan ana Improvement ON any alu
this company had contract with the defendant to Dud
aud equip is road at S2OOOOOO mile, VINE Uni. SUI
sdiary company had contract with the hdseO0r iOn
Company 70 61 ID the road a. @5g2oJ3 e I9s pr
eriy would DE abs0fDid ny bls loan am il'to' ii
Company, and II the plaintiff hnaly succeeded IL "Oud
reading this AFFIDAVIT submitted that JUDGE Se1gWick,
under comfy OF toe Bench was the only Judge VINO
should ne appealed to sus I'd MS own jul I'm nj.
Mr. LOwrey desired to complete some afdhYlts ana the
matter was adjourned until Tuesday Mr. IOwfey stated
that proceeding would be begun to-day or tomorrow,
the Supreme Court 10 have commissioners 20 deter
mine woa injury would De done the SIKH Avenue Kan
road COmpany's franchise by the Elevated Road
David dudley Field has Oi the counsel Tor
the New-York Elevated Railroad Company In moion
before Iudse j +. Day, the Court OF common Pleas,
for reference TO ascertain the damage done 10 the
Elevated Railroad Company oy the Injunction IA th5
suit brought against 10 by the Ninth Avenue RarOad
Company David Dudley Field ana Mr. DeiaVan pressed
the motion while 5ir Scrbner opposed H. on the ground
that iIe unfinished.
Many Of the best known contractors arc considering
the proposals OF the New York Elevated Railroad 10
sid another track tho west side oil the cay ana 10
continue fnc line to Slsts that sld ana 20 consdc
double track road the east side with CONNECTIONS 20
the ferries. The bids will be opened on OctoDef -
Several firms, now making estimates. W0uid De abe 70
coinpcfp from half q mile To q mr- mO-tn, and 70 y
confidently expected that double track viii be hnshed
to sls,t b. January l. On the east s4e the roaN n!
be completed as soon possible under the contracts to
be opened ON OotODer 2.