New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-09-30
TIE BROADWAY FRANCHIS Sc.
A PUBLIC AUCTION NOT NECESSARY.

JUSTICE DONOHUE DrSsOLYEs THE INJUNCTION
AGAINST THE ALDERMEN-HIs REASONS.
Justice D)nohue yesterday vacated the In
junction restraining the Board Of Aldermen as indlviu.
al, from voting Tor giving 10 tho Broadway Surface
Railroad Company the privilege OF laying rail-
road in Broadway, provided the consent 81
tbs property-owners and tho conrt can be OBJ
tanned The question L. tho Justice says,
whether the Aldermen. trustees for the people, have
exceeded their duty in granting their consent withOu!
cxacing some compensation putting the franchise up
at public auction. There il nothing Ina the bill the Justice
declares that shows there any present danger oany such
construction, and if the Aldermen wrongflly give the
pr lcgc this suit without injunction. will produce all
that Mr. Knox aud others Joined in the suit entitled TO-
An injunction. Therefore Justified All that
given any event il the corporations consent to apply
the people the for the privilege ugbt by tho
defending company. the Broadway Surface Railroad
Company. All these questions can he properly passed
upon in the present application of that company to tho
General Term Of the Supreme Court for the privilege Of
constructing railroad in Broadway. eff under
the permission or without the permission"
the Justice continues the defendant com.
pany shond procure the consent Of The majority ~
the properyownerr IN Broadway for one 30 NOT see
any reason why the city OF Ne~,fork should make .
way the owners OF which desire the construction of tho
railway"
the franchise mp at public auction the Justice saws that tho
LEGISLATURE seems 10 nave lcf entirely WIN the Common
which the privilege shall be granted while the legislature
in regard to the people has substituted IN certain cases
the General Term a. Commi regard to the
people, has nowhere shown intent "a substitute the
court for the consent of the Common Coun-
ell in regard to the building OF the road. But
II IL had, and the court il in tho
condition 10 dispose Of that question. how does II then
stand The Broadway Surface Railroad Company has 40
to build the road and the other company has such
these parties for the ocallcd franchise put mp al
pco Of pn IpT pPc and thu ' oar has not f H@
auction "omd seem to suppose AN c4n5hg
which only one party could exercise when the permis
sion given by the Common Council should be given under
ell has Improperly given away franchise for which
large sum of money offered. the Justice says that
given hc cauno shut his eyes that I'M. d.
contention between rival companics l. there any such
G,rnrii G,r ,or ronseIt 70 iid ro,dl ofthc rropn
-iuon of the broadway RAILROAD Company TO lid at
auction sll" several hundred thousand dollars for th'
tieht 40 build ard opcritca road n Broadway. the '
tic. declares: The Common Council have me right .
efc no such privilege A that they hive B. loo consent
that person who gets hc consent ~ tr poop or
of tine count may build such u railroad Ihcr
cannot include the court or the people ir
and so ,he oo That appcars f, 6s,e been msc could
ur.cr have boon madc % benefit a. the city"
cable Company of Fl.OpDoOO fog Me- fru,h..r "cnln
a,in rd.t No. ' I".i'"g h''t. t14 urd' Ill., II
ao,,rtrd ib' r'y w"dd Doc emitted 10 no'bus Nnth.t
we '' l'- W t,'' IVY ''i4ih't Ih" - N"i W." ,l,
paly uIo obtains sum 'ou.'nL TO- apply
t,oh r Nh. nts boo fnr sfr,u t,4t d nYst f,tprlbia
U.ht fi i. prtspu WIN mido ulrm. ,r" g. n"ilns 1u
uir sli.p,at rr'ol'b brnrnt tp urm. d noi ibinH
ou un plrs'w m..i"n uni 'I,p "H" iW 'gWm'n
uf' 90 i' i'' .'pi mPnrni ih' l'H u ''" W,i ih't
'1'Hd 'Hn'' 'nt r''hnIul "h'hi =" l' 'li. lh''H
rti.s DO ih, ,otpprtilpu. no ptriiif bthHni hrinii
'nn "'s' 800, 'lr l,,n.'i 'l lN' 'i-' ,' , .
'.i ,,d l,r ,ll a,.rion, ll,t htr ARISEN uul, To-,
900 d.