The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1891-10-19
RAPID TRANSIT OR NOT?
Chancellor McGl1l Listens
to Argument of
Counsel.
THE MAYORS AFFIDAVIT.
He Supposed the Company Was
Merely Making Experiments
Decision Reserved.

-Dugan and any other city official from
interfering with the company's extension
of its electric road to the ferry, came up
before the Chancellor this morning.
Mrs vredenbergh began the proceed
ings by reading the bill OF the railroad
company. This set forth the act of the
Legislature of 1859. under which the
company was authorized to lay tracks in
this city. Under this act the company
has maintained double track
railroad through yMontgomery street
from the Ferry to Bergen avenue
In section four of this act it was provided
thatthe municipal authorities should not
interfere with or obstruct the company
in its operations, provided it complied
with the established grades of the streets
through which 1t ran its tracks. In
March, 1856. the Legislature passed
an act which gave the company authority
to use electricity, cable OF other
motors, on its road, provided it obtained
the consent of the municipal authorities.
Under this act the company applied to
the Board of Aldermen and obtained
from that body permission to use electri-
city on its Montgomery street route.
The bill then relates that June 5, 1890,
when the company undertook to con-
struct the electric plant the work was
sto pped by Mr.. Dugan, and the company
oh tained from the Chancellor an order to
show cause why the city should not be re-
strained from interfering with the work.
The city offered no further objections
and the road was cons trncted and oper-
ated from Varick street TO Bergen ave-
nue.. Subsequently the Board of Alder
men passed resolution directing the
company to continue the road to the
ferry. Acting under this resolution the
company undertook to extend the system
eastward, but as soon as it started to erect a
pole it was stopped by Mr.. Dugan, and
the:were men arrested. The bill then recite
the visits of committee of the Beard of
Trade to the Street and Water Board to
request the Board not to In terfere
with the extension of the road; how
President Somers of the Board said that
it was not the Board but the company
that was retarding the extension of the
system. and told how. The company
then started once more to erect posts and
We're again stopped by Mr.. Dugan. The
bill also stated the company had spent
large sum of money for poles, wires and
motors, which were now lying idle.
THE CITY'S ANSWER.
The answer OF the city was read by Mr..
Hudspeth. It admitted the acts of the
Legislature, under which the company
operated its road. 1t claimed that there
was nothing in these acts which took
from The city authorities the right to con-
troll its streets. 1t admitted the passage
right to use electricity, but claimed
that it meant that the COM
pany was only to experiment
with electricity. The motors were used
only through sparsely settled portio on OF
the city. The answer also claimed that by
the act creating the present Board of
Street and Water Commissioners the
Board had the right to revoke or
amend any ordinance relative to the
use of the streets of the city; that
the Street and Water Board, acting un-
der this authority, passed supple ment
to the ordinance, allowing the company
to use electricity, which sprovided that
before the company could extend its
system to the ferry, it must file with the
Street ana Water Board a plan of its
system and receive permission from the
Board to use that plan before they could
put it in operation.
In disregard of this order the company.
the answer claimed, attempted to erect
poles on Montgomery street, east of Jer-
sey avenue, without first having filed its
plans or obtained the permission OF the
Board to do SO. and 1t was stopped by
Commissioner Dugan, Chairman Of the
Committee on Streets.
THE ELECTRIC POWER.
The answer further sets up that. the
company proposes to take its power from
the Jersey Cihy Electric Light Company,
and that the Electric Company mas not
complied with the ordinance referred to.
Pains were taken to emphasize the fact
that the Board did not wish>tO interfere
with rapid transit but simply wished to
make the company respect its ordinances
and regulations.
Accompanying the answer was an affi-
davit by Mayor Cleveland, which 'devel-
oped into an argument against the troll.
ley system. The Mayor swore that at
the time he signed the ordinance grant
il G the company the right to use electric
ity, he understood that it was simply
for the purpose OF allowing
the company to experiment. with the var.
ions methods of propulsion by electricity.
He declared that the question of rapid
transit or increased facilities of travel for
the public were not involved in the mat
ter as the company had not put on anv
extra cars or sought to accommodate the
public.
Then he refers to shocking accident
which had recently happened in a neigh
boring city whereby several horses have
been Killed by the trolley system, "as will
appear by newspaper clipping hereto
annexed"
THE MAYOR AND THE DEADLY TROLLEY.
The Mayor grew eloquent over the
deadly trolley SYSTEM" and spoke of
the net work of death dealing wires
which the company would spread over
the city.
As Mr.. Hudspeth proceeded with the
reading OF the affidavit the Mayors ami
mostly became so apparent that even the
Chancellor, whose countenance seldom
changes during the hearing of a cause,
found himself obliged to suppress a
smile which played over his face In spite
of himself The affidavit went on to say
that the company proposed TO extend the
system through a po tion of the city
which was densely populated and where
the strests were narrow, where it would
be most dangerous TO life and property.
Mr.. Vredenbergh, arguing for the In
junction, concluded that under the vari-
Gus acts of the Legislature all the COM
pany had to do before it could operate an
electric road was to obtain the consent of
the municipal authorities, and that it
had done. The city once having given
that permission, could not, he claimed,
revoke that permission
The Chancellor said that the only diff
Guilty he could see was whether the con-
sent the Aldermen had given the COM
pany authorized 1t to use poles
and wires The Mayor said that
when he signed the ordinance
the company ives experimenting, and it
seemed to the chancellor that he in
tended then to give the company the
right to use any system 1t should elect 1t
was settled that when city had
once given a company the right
use electricity, and the company had
spent money in preparing to use that con-
sent, the committees could not revoke ii