The Sunday tatler and Jersey City express. (Jersey City, N.J.) 1883-1886, 1885-01-18

M.
Inere Is nothing in that case, in my Judge
ment which affects the charter Of this
company upon any other subject If the
doctrine of that case is to be maintained
the Morris Bnd Essex Railroad Company
SO long as it exists, viii only be subject to
taxation under the provisions of the act Of
1860. 1t the Legislature repeats the ehar-
tel of the Morris and Essex Railroad Com
pany, that corporation no longer exists.
and therefore cannot make any claim un-
der any act. If the State takes the road
under the charter of the Company, then
the old corporation no longer exists The
transfer of the property and franchises to-
the purchaser, under proceedings such as
L have suggested would not pass the i'm
munlty from general taxation contained in
the act of 1865. The Legislature could
certainly guard against any such right or
privilege passing, by expressly declaring
that such privilege should not pass, and
that the new corporation should be sub
gect to the general tax laws of the State
The commission or board heretofore sue-
gested could ascertain and report the
amount which would be required to be
PAID by the State, OF its yendee, to aeqnirel
tins road AID its extensions and branches.
in 1890,
The Somerville and Easton Railroad
Company was incorporated in 1847; [P L.
1877, page 12S,l bya supplement passed in
lS49 lP. L. 1849, page 80, The name was.
changed to the Central Railroad of New
Jersey. The charter of this company pro-
vIdes for like proceedings to ascertain the
cost of the road as soon as finished so as to
be used, and the taking of it by the State
at the expiration of fifty years from its
completion, at the first cost thereof
This road has been leased to the Phifa-
delphia and Reading Railroad Company
under the supplement to the General
Railroad act, approved March 18th, 1880,
[P. L. 1880, page 231. Although il is
contended that this act does not expressly
reserve the rights of the State under such
lease, yet think there can be no doubt
that the courts would hold that any lease
made under this general act, would be
subJaot to the rights of the State, what
ever they might be at the time of such
lease. One of these rights is to take the
road at first cost. 1t may be prudent,
however, for the Legislature to pass some
declaratory act affirming the right Of the
State to take the Central Railroad at cost,
under its charter, and require the Reading
Railroad Company to assent thereto, and
In default of such assent to repeal the
charter of the Central Railroad Company.
This road was required to file sworn
statement of its first cost, but failed to do
so. suggest legislation under which that
| cost can be correctly ascertained.
| The Morris Canal and Banking Company
was Incorporated by an act passed Dec.
S1st 1924 lP. L. 1924, page 1851 Its char
ter provides that at the end of SO years
| from the passage of the act, or within one
| year thereafter, the State may take Canal
and appurtenances, at the fair value there
of, to be determined by commissioners as
provided in the act.
MORE STRINGENT LEGISLATION PROPOSED
Nearly all the railroads of the State are
| liable to be taken by the State under their
| charters, but it is not important at the
/ present time to specially consider their
charters in reference to this question, as I
am only dealing with this power SO far as
| it bears upon taxation, and the taking Of
the roads by the State when necessary in.
| order to regain the power to tax them
under the general laws A general act
| should be passed under which the first
cost of every railroad and canal could be
ascertained, and it should ais provide for
legal proceedings to protect the rights Of
the State in determining the amount to be.
paid any railroad or canal company when
the State shall elect to take its road or
canal under its charter.
| would also suggest in view of the claim
made by the Philadelphia and Reading
| Railroad Company, as to the effect of the
lease of the New Jersey Central Railroad
Company made to that corporation under
the act of 1880 2. L. 1880, puge 231, Sec
ton IL, that an act should he passed to
| prohibit any corporation from exercising
any of the powers given by the act of 1880,
| unless it should first file in the office of
the Secretary of State an agreement, and
thereafter also embody in any lease or con-
tract made under that act provision.
that the exercise OF any power hereunder
| should not be construed to deprive the
State of the power to repeal its charter and
to subject the company, its franchise and
property, to any tax law then in force or
that might thereafter be passed; and fur
ther that any lease or contract made under
that act should not be construed to prevent
the State from exercising the right to take
the franchise or property of the lessor, I'M
der its charter. Such act might also provide
that this legislation should not be con-
strued as an admission of the right of any
company to be exempt from the operation
of any general tax law, or as an admission
that there was any surrender of the right
of the State to repeal the charter of any
| corporation or the right to take its rovd
under its charter. There might also be in
the same or another act, legislative dNr
| laratlon that In the passage of the act
| 1880 it was not intended to permit
lessee, taking road, to continue any
emption from taxation or 10 restric
aLridge the right of the State 10 repeal
original act of incorporation, or any O
supplements, or to take the road of
lessor under the provisions of its char
The Legislature in the passage of the
of 1880 certainly never contemplated {
a foreign corporation should absorb
mestio corporation for 999 years and tn
by take from tie State the right to rep
the charter of the lessor, the right to S
| ject it to equal taxation, or the rikh
take the road upon paying its first cest
am confident that no court will uphol
| construction of this act, which will b.
the effect commended for by the railrc
that have ayailed themselves of its
visions.
The claims that have been made III
that act, whether valid or not, show the
dom Of guarding against such conten
IN the future by appropriate legisl
which will fully protect the rights of
State.
POLICE POWERS.
In addition to the power to amend or
peal the charters of these companies,
State has general police power over all
them, lrrespectivs of any contract cont
ed in any of their charters. It can m
such reasonable regulations for thecos
of the business of these companies
may deem essential to the health or
of the public. The State has not and
uot divest itself of this police power.
legislature cab make contract which
take this police power from any subsequ