The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1891-08-04
WAR ON THE BIG PIPE LINE.
Land Owners Testing Newark's
Right to Exercise Eminent
Domain.

NEWARK, Aug. 4, 1s9t.-The East Jersey
Water Company. which holds the great
5000 600 contract to supply Newark with
pure water, is not to have matters all its
own way in the matter Of condemuing
lands for its pipe line. Messrs. Singer
land g. Garrabrant are determined TO
push the suit which they have begun to
test the rights of the company aud Of the
city Of Newark under the law passed last
winter.
Argument will be heard IN the Su-
preme Court during the September term.
but meanwhile the company win press
the condemnation proceedings. The
Commissioners appointed to assess the
damages to the property Of Messrs. Sling
erland aud Garrabrant, to be taken Tor
the pipe line. will meet on the 18th inst.
and proceed to fix the amount considered
due the owners by reason Of the line
crossing their lands. After the report OF
the Com missioners nothing can be done
until the Supreme Court case Is decided,
such being the order OF the Court in
granting the writ and in ordering the
Commission. Should the case be fought
out In court considerable time will be re-
quired, and the completion Of the pipe
line would therefore be delayed--possibly
beyond the date fixed for delivering the
water of Newark. As the amount in
volved does not exceed $40, 900 or S15, 900, IL
is. of course, possible the East Jersey
Company NAV settle the dispute by pri-
vate arrangement with the contesting
owners and put an end TO the litigation.
Should this not be done the argument IN
court and the decision 10 follow will be OF
large importance.
WHAT THE LAWYERS CLAIM.
The claim of the counsel of contesting
owners, Lawyers Adrian Rlker and Nah
lon Pitney, is that Newark is not author
lied by law to exercise the right OF emf
nent domain for the condemnation of
lands for the East Jersey Water Com
papy. 1t could do SO II it were construct
ing the water works itself. but II Is as
serted that such a power cannot be used
on behalf of q mere contractor, without
very different legislation from that which
has been obtained heretofore. It Is fur
ther claimed that the law which author
ized the city to make a contract with the
Water Company has been exceeded in
various particulars. aud that 1t will not
stand legal test. The counsel will, 1t is
expected, make a review Of the contract
in their briefs, and. should the case not
be settled, some notable legal develop
ments may come out.
1T USED TO BUY LAND.
Heretofore the Water Company has Sc
cured the lands needed for reservoirs and
the pipe line with very little litigation.
Most of the reservoir property was
bought at moderate prices on long OPP
tions, before the contract was made, and
there was scarcely any friction. The pipe
line property, however. was not bought
until later, the company not having de-
cided upon the route. and there has been
more trouble with these purchases. Con-
domination proceedings have been
brought In more than one case; but the
cases spoken Of above are the first IN
which the legal rights of the parties TO
the contract have been seriously chal-
lenged.
The East Jersey Company apparently
expects TO have its most serious litigation
after the water has begun 70 be delivered,
with the owners of mill properties below
the Macopin intake. BY the contract
with Newark the city Is to furnish legal
aid as far as possible; but, on the other
hand. the company is, Of course, bound
to give the city a clear title to its works