New-York tribune., 1891-02-21
FIGHTING THE TROLLEY.
PRoPERrY.owNERs DEFEATED IN COURT:
THE STATE BOARD OF RAILROAD COMMISSION


THE STATE BOARD OF RAILROAD COMMISSION
ERs GIVE THEM BREATHING SPACE.
The motion of John W and Paul G. Decker TO con-
nue the Injunction against the use OF certain consents
OF property change Of motive power on tho
routes of the Harlem Bridge Morrisana and Fordham
Railway Company was denied by Justice lDgraham In
supreme Court. Chambers, yesterday.
The plaintiffs sued on behalf Of Themselves and some
ninety other property along the line OF the
railroad. who had revoked the consents Which hey
gave last summer for change OF motive power 10 ei'ne
Gable or electric power The property owners ciameu
that they had been misled into supposing that only
cable power was 20 be used and that they would not
have signed il they had known that the trolley over
hcah electric system contemplated Ihe pialh-
tIhs alleged that the company's agent mad actnaiy
made Misrepresentation to them upon this point ana
had promised that only cable power would be used.
They contended that this was fraud which entitled
them to the injunction. These allegations were all
denied by the railroad company, which also insisted
that the plaintiffs had not even made out a prlma
fhcle case OF fraud.
Justice Ingrasam SO holds in his opinion He says
Assuming that the story told by the palnth IS uie'
the allegation is sufficient to justify hndlhg tha'
the consents obtained by fraud. The consent on
It's face for the substitution Of electricity as to
motive power for the operation OF its railway Persons
signing the consents chargeabe with kno"ledgc oi
lis terms. The statement that the company "ouIu
use one OF the methods designated in the consent was
n mere statement Of what the company would do IN
the future was not statement OF an existing facs
that would Justify the Court in setting aside the con-
sent. on the ground that 1t was obtained by tauu,
nor does it appear that this application was at all
necessary to protect plaintiffs rights
The Railroad Commissioners are not bound by the !
consents obtained from the property owners thclr
right to act is entirely Independent OF that OF tue
propcrtyOwncr and Is merely the consent OF tho |
public officers acting behalf OF the people OF the
state to the proposed change. Before the defendants
can substitute electricity for the present method in pro-
pcing their cars they must obtain the consent OF
tie p?Opcry-owners and whether or not such conseh'
has been obtained Will be determined when the COM
pany attempts TO make the substitution. IHe ohy |
effect o this Injunction would be to restrain the de-
PENDANTS from informing the Board OK Railroad COM
mi-sIoncr that they had the required consents OF inc
propcrty.owncrs and no reason Is shown why they
shoud not make that statement. II they claim that
they have such consent tle paintih and those inter
csted with him have right to appear before the com
miSSoncrs and deny their statement ana the 10
lcndants should be more enloned from MAKING
the statement than tho plaintiff should he enioined
from denying II.
1t would not be proper. therefore, on this motion TO
pas upon tho question whether or not the property
owners having once consented to the substitution OF
electricity can subsequently withdraw that consent
The facts are not before the court That would
Justify determination upon that question: nor arc
%. the property owners who have Withdrawn their
consents, with the exception OF the plaintiffs before
the court SO as 10 be bound by adjudication. and
as II seems to me clear the stated that no
IS presented that would justify preliminary IN
lunctIol the motion should be denied. Motion denied
with go cost, and temporary injunction vacated
Arthur G. Butts and G. = simpson appeared for inc
property owners. Augustus ). Hutchihs, Henry W.
>ackct aud Governor Wise were the counsel io
tie rWVay company.
The application Of the same railroad company, for
10 introduce tie trolley electric motor syS-
TEN on road had another hearing Yesterday before
the state Board Of Railroad Commissioners In tho
room, of the Chamber Of Commerce Augustus -
uichlus and -C;ovcrnor John }. Wise appeared foi
tho railroad company. and Arthur c. Butts and {. =
simpson represented the obiecting property owners
The meeting stormy ono, the eontre OF dis
turbancc being the competitive massing OF consents.
withdrawal, II consent and withdrawals OF WIN
dr.wal, ~ the abutting property holders.
The attorneys for the rUnd Rad the opinion OF Judge
Inlra an. Of the supreme Court, already mentioned
Nr Iuichins then presented q detailed statement m
the value of the property abutting on the colnpan'S
hnc, and the proportion represented BY tho consents
oi ,iucd for tie proposed change Of motive power
The assessed valuation of tho property IL Thirdavc.
rom OnohLudrd aud twenty ilhthst 10 f"u"a"
wa, placed at sfdll.-7j. mailing me reqpiFtd al"rw
s-.}O5,3-. Consents had tccn obtained LOT pEVPI.V
Long thl, limo 10 tho amount Il ~ s36,5jO. With
dr,,Wal, II consent obtained BY opposing property
Iplc, r,pre., nt,-I ~ 10000. Rctracuols OF tc'e
v.tldavil, had been I'm turu secured To tie amount
Il Sl3dioO giving tho rOroAd company HiAIor'' VI
rit-.tl1.
In ro,ton-avc, the total valuation Of me aoutuhs
prOpr.tt. Mr. lutchn, said, was t'3O,4Io. inc
mai consents Obtained along THIS lle ainouh"n 10
s.ul..eo Property owners representing slg2vOo ad
flied withdraw als u consent. subsequently Ir"'n
drgt9als ~ the amount " $1,000 had been sctured'
lsylng the company with +6j421 less than the Ic-
qulred valrlton TN Bos Oh ave. In Neetric'lcI ave
tho excess ~ consents obtained amounted T. tlSC;iHO
I'm Lincoln ave. $4,000, IN one hundred ana thry-
c.ghtI-,t.. Sa45.37j, and In one hundredaiiu tirS
third t.. s;l 900 p. go H.,
Mr. Butt, raised the point that the Boston'ave. Iho
was In r,.tlity -eparatc line and that therefore
majority Of the property actually aOuttnG 9h tnat no
must De represented III thc SDnScuU'' A'N' P'''''"
wa sustained by the commissioners.
The attorneys for the opposing propegy' 'oWheS a.
serted with considerable degree OF warmth tlat SUI
ncicnt time should De allowed for them I. eAiinihc w"
new batch Of consents and rclIhcuohN OF "iuu'"Hls
utrhuccd by the counsel for the company Ncr a
spirited war Of word, between Tho oDDSInE 'oulNrl
tie request was granted. the oonmlsslo giving one
week for the desired examination. Al tlc expiration
of that time the Board VIII determine "HcI"I ""oV"cI
hearing Of the is necessary.