New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-04-27

district and to be the only persons bodies come
law thus he general In it scope character and
yet OF necessity local in ITS particular application Bni
tcar district and cannot have any effect elsewhere To
De local act within this clause OF the an
and have no application except 10 that locality. All
sarily be ooaiconned to one city or couniybut The
act affects them all alike although 1t affects each IN us
locality.
The not open 70 any objection the ground that
II delegated legislative power to the commissioner
power whose exercise IL necessary Tor the resloneh
simply power of location The provisions OF tie statute
In question here not what Is forbidden by me recent
amendments TO the Constitution 10 wit, private bii
granting TO this specific corporation the right to lay down
railroad tracks private bill granting to this spcbc
II does exclude other corporation fro
the same or any other use OF the specified streets
does not confer upon the respondents an exclusive fgh
10 build or run railroad between any two points; u u,
Of an extension OF what is the defendants property
and lwha therefore, no one else can use ILeie mus
fer rights on existing railroads to authorize them
TO build connections and extensions. IL Is IN ~.
ton of all persons All that the Constitution demands
in such is that all existing corporations OF me cas
law is not affected by the extraneous accidental crcum
stance that there is or only one corporation ia en
class to which it rctses. The rule contended Tor
by the directors to the statute Is that staan1c
general In its phraseology. and IN terms aPpl,
cable TO a class which is sufficiently described Is not
general law If there happen 10 be IN existence al te
the class aud so included by the description An act Of
legislature however,
would include and apply fifty corporations II thee wtar
many Of the class described does mo-, lose It's character
because there happens to be only one Euch n eAiS'e
MR.. vANDERPoEL SPEAKS.
Mr. A. j. Vanderpoe followed behalf OF the respond
ens He reced the first section OF the act and SAID the
appointment OF the commission by the Mayor was hoth
ing than reference OF the case to board OF en-
gineers or individuals to ascertain whether III view OF e
whole question this extension OF the road offered greater
facilities for travel The Mayors commissioners, he SAID
1I.a, imn
Supreme Court Commissioners due hearing no one
complained OF OF notice, but the appellants asked
for more time That discretionary with the COM
nissoncrs and the question whether they having
filed bushel basket with afdavits, as it were shouu
have an additional week produce more lie contihueo
It was said they had not proved they were Corpof
ton but that ritng with the court rs lhe oo ~, W
CoInmoh Pleas had recognized that the YORK BIC
iests heretofore enjoyed by the 'Yonkers Rail-
road The law did prescribe any no
uronerT or acquiring title but notice was gwen, and
persons represented IL was III no sense nhe i
heard both Sides and decided the matter IL was
not surprising that opposition was encountcredd
n appellants claimed in the court below
that the application to the supreme Co nec nor aGe by
May0r and not by the Elevated Railroad COMPANY; but
the railroad company party authorized and
could have been made by any party nlerHsteu ~ ,h he
commissioners were regular according to law:
Private interests always suffers from WORKS
public convenience, but private owners always e1aH
gcac their loss Elevated railroad transit roads arc
The ouenirg of era in cities and pubic improve
ments They the application OF public streets 10
new public purpose, answering the imperative necessity
for means to be cheapy furnished for the rapu con-
yeyance persons and property from one emo Oh GIc
city like New York to another. They were not 80 siet
an ncony1 niece hOrsecar tracks ana horses soOn
became accustomed to these silent vehicles over lST
heads He did concedc that this was the only ee
waited railway because the Harlem Hallway was eIe
waited for thee miles, and the International Brlug ~
Niagara was approached by elevated railway. now
ar The rights those companies were considered by tne
legislature lie did not know, but they were perfectly
ling so far ms the LEGAL effect OF il concerned 10
CO.. EIDE that there but elevated railroad III thc
OF New-YorN, ana then the provisions OF me
30 section of the were constitutional ana must DC
sls cd.
j. Comstoc,, in reply, argued that the act was
clear unconstitutional and 1t WAS only passed win the
view O. circumyenting the Constitution. lie CANNED
that the Elevated Railroad never purchased the rights
and franchises OF the Yonkers Railroad and had no pow"
er at all had no power to compensate persons or
property IL they wished to- The act was In no sense
general one must be held to be special one passed
for special purpose.
His argument lasted for over two hours ana the court
adjourned until o'clock tomorrow friday morning
and will give five hours the argument on the Gilbert
ELEVATED Railroad.