New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-01-07

you must pay 100000 anyway. and II you ca9t
agree you may acquire by right Of eminent domain,
Infamous that the election two Of the officials
had 10 pledge themselves not to carry 1t our; one IS
dead, the other is now doing what he plcdeed MN
self not to do.
The constitution, said Mr. GayDOr, provided that
no private or local hill should be passed by the
Legislature which embraced more than one sub
ject, and that subject should be expressed III Its
title. as there more than one subject IN this
bill?" he said. If you say yes that ends It,
1t is unconstitutional. If you say no, then we
ask Is the subject expressed in the title" The
first clause of the bills title says the object is to
annex Ncw-Lots to the city Of Brooklyn. The
last clause of the title says, and for the acqusi-
ton and regulation Of tie water supply thereof.
That means clearly enough the city Of brooklyn
t. acquire and regulate the water supply. III
stead of acquiring ana regulating it the bill in
trenches the water company on two les hrmly
set against the city Of Brooklyn and against the
power Of the city Of Brooklyn to interfere with IT,
That is what the people discovered after t c bill
had been passed, for the story is that changes
were made III il a. the last moment.
This bill placed a breastwork around the
water company and forbade the city from inter
fering with it in any way. may add that if this
clause giving the private corporation protection
and immunity is unconstitutional II must follow
that the clause giving the city authority 10 pay
these people Tor their plant Is nhcOnst1 tu'lOllaI
Also fac law by mere of words created
great asset to Tins company and coerccd the city
INTO paying great deal of money for the properly.
| consider this question of 81 great moment lidu
the injunction should he continued until the
highest court passes upon 1t, for 1t Will pass
upon II.
" have nothing TO do with any tribunal but
this Mr.. Gaynor,' said Justice Bartlett a the
lawyer finished speaking.
Corporation Counsel jerks then began his argu-
mcnt on behalf of the Mayor and the other de-
PENDANT officials. saying that the law gave the
Mayor and his associates the absolute rlght 10
buy the property.
Wasn't the postponcmcnt of any attempt 10
negotiate at the time that the right OF eminent
domain might be exercised an invitation 70 the
company 10 ask higher price," interposcd JUS
No." answered Mr. jerks. 81 will speak Of
that il moment. The important point is the
question of exclusive privilege
Or immunity INTERCEPTED the Court.
"Yes, immunity" answered Mr.: jerks. and
went on This is neither privilege nor I'M
munty: it is merely a restriction which says
you shall not supply water in this ward during
the lifetime OF the company lEr night 70 sup
laturc had the right TO give to or withhold from
But" said judge Bartlett, suppose another
enjoy that immunity ?" I'm coming 10 that -
sail Mir jerks The plaintiff Is trying t. show
what the property was worth fifteen months ago
considerations that led tie Mayor 10 think II
worth much now
Is that the question at issue ?" SAID the Court.
" Isn't il what 1t should he bought for ,"
NO" answered the Corporation Counsel.
But" continued the Judge, suppose You del
egate man to buy some property and he gives
81, 600 for it. and YOU say to him, IT could have
been bought for $500 1t is not proper excuse
for him to say. Mr. jerks, you will make money
out of it at that Doesn't the question come
oh, very likely" said Mr. jerks: 81 think
it does. But the plaintiff says this company mis-
represented, and that it is eXtravagsnt TO pay
sum for all the rights II has, just because that
sum- when applied TO the stock alone, makes
its price $500"
sented by the stock" asked the Court.
Mr. jerks thought it did. but not par
ticularly decided that point.
Justice Bartlett asked: "On what theory has
the city the right TO pay for this valuable priv
iege that the company has The act does not
say anything about that 1t says it may buy
what this company has
The city is restrained from entering the ter
ritory. and it must buy its way in answered
the Corporation Counsel
But you argue that the Legislature does not
confer privilege
Yes, but it was a restrictive liberation from
which they must Guy SAID Mr.. Jerks. He then
tried 10 show why the whistle wos worth what
Thomas F. Pcarsar submitted brief on be.
half of the Long Island Water Supply Company.
and said that lie would not discuss the questions
that had been thoroughly gone over BY Mr.. jerks
lie only spoke Of The organization Of the COMPANY,
Us valuable privileges under the contract with the
town OF Ncw-Lots. and submitted that the city
conld not take these away. as IL annexed the
town subject to its obligations
Mr.. GaynOr desired 10 correct statement NJ
Mr.. Jcnls's that all the plaintiffs afldavits were
on information and belief lie made some de-
cidedly positive statements OF fact.
The case then handed up Justice Bartlett
remarked that in such cases which prayed simply
for an Injunction pending trial tc would ordinarI;
decide at once. but he thought hc ought 10 read
I'll the afflavits and Mr. Pcarsllrs brief before
giving decision. He would cecide the case to-
day or Tomorrow