New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-07-31
LEGAL STEPS TAKEN.
TRYING TO STOP A FRANCHISE.
A PROPERTY OWNER OPPOSES TIE UNION RAIL

A PROPERTY OWNER OPPOSES TIE UNION RAIL
ROAD COMPANY.
In the Supreme Court Yesterday Judge Julien
granted order to show cause why an mum, wv,
should not be issued restraining the Union Railroad
Company from taking any steps TO coh7'r".' M
road In Unlon-st. or issue stocks or Doh's e'"'s
any right 10 the franchise claimed to be possessed
fer railroad In the street. The order Is 'e.''''Do
on August s. II Is secured in the SUIT Des" Wy o''
Adamson a property owner In the h"oe'' "s""
the city, represented by the Bonrd Oh hue''"o"'
who granted the franchise, and the Chloh h"'iio''
Company Mr. Adamson lives at NO. '"' '"roH
ST. In the complaint he sets forth t'at ne i
citizen OF the Jnltch States and Of the state OF New
York resident in the city Of Brooklyn. and fFechodr
ard cector therein, and his assessment on real co
therein owned by him amounts to more '""" F''o'o'
and he is liable to he taxed upon such assessment III
said city, and has boon 90 assessed and has 50 pald
taxes In said city on such assessment "i''h' olc
year previous TO the beginning of this action
Plaintiff + the owner fee Of premises sitnateu on
the soutnery side OF Union-s In the sam Guy VI
brooklyn. which known upon the assessor map
OF the Twenty second Ward Of said city A. lots nos 81
and GO block 10 In said ward.
The defendants Michael j. Cofey. Theodore
Maurcr Thomas \. Bcari, Robert Mack"llhr' Ar'hur
J. iIeanry, Arson Ferguson, James Mc''hrri' MoNc'
l. Wafer DAME. McGrath. william MCGEE. D. JeHer'
Richard Meier Samuel Myers, Charles j. NolcRchh8
nre and at al the times mentioned in this complains
were members Of the Board OF Aldermen oi A"" '''S
Of Brooklyn. and ms such they are by Inc chAfcr VI
the said city trustees of the property funds ana
effects Of said city and the palntih l. ceSth que
trust rs to the snme and the said Individual de-
PENDANTS such trustees are subject to all the d'leS'
responsibilities and liabilities Of trustees.
The defendant, the Union Railroad Company OF
the city Of brooklyn, claims to be a domestic cor
pornton organized to build street surface rnirNn
commencing at the northerly end of Ferry race
running thence souhcrly along Ferry Place to llaml
ton ave; thence casterly along Hamilton ave 10
Union ST.. thence oasterly along Unon-st. to Ninth
ave- and Prospect Park and thence sOuth"ry along
Nnth.ave. to Twcntieth-st in the city OF brooklyn
Among the largest stockholders I'm the said cor
pontIon defendant and among It's directors are GER
tain persons. to wit: John Dclmar. Edward frlei'
Thomas a. Kerrigan. Michael Murphy, Z. H. Flynn
md Anthony Barrett and other persons To the plain
iii unknown. who we'll known and Influential
politicians in the city OF Brooklyn.
The complaint scts forth how the Union Street
RnilwAy Company offered 10000 FOR the franchise.
while tho defendant company Offered nothing aud the
facts relative 70 the granting Of the franchise by the
Aldermen the veto by Mayor Body. and the passing
Of ,hc resolutions the veto. OF these action, IL
IS set forth:
such vote WAS matter Of political fear and
fovor and was the result Of collision between the said
individual defendant. md the directors aud persons
interested ia the defendant railroad company, and the
same was done With the Intent the part OF the said
colndlng pcrssn4 TO cheat and defraud the city OF
Drcukyn ont Of the value Of sad franchise, and was
breach of tru, the part Of the said individual de
PENDANTS.
The plaintiff alleges that the said pretended nan
chsc Is Illegal null aud void for the reason that the
uroylsns ~ tho chnrcr OF the city OF rOohyn lave
lit MIL In that
owner, of property upon the streets and avenues along
which said railroad u De constructed df not hrst
petition the Common Council 81 the city OF hr"RNh
therefor and I'm Tint N" alleged grant thcn
PR was not AWARDED and gwen to the person Ut
corp ration who agreed. with adequate security 10
carry IN engsr, on such railroad AZ the lowest rate OF
fare md IN that such alleged grant was not awnrdci
after puhllc notice inviting proposal, therefor at
specifics! time and place had been publish under th'
direction If the Common council daily for six weeks
IN four Of public newspapers printed In sald CITY, ~
provided by law
II +, further set forth that the grant IS Illegal be-
cauae the II majority of the property ""'''N
WI, not secured. and IN" application WAS not n"Ncr
tied fourteen times according To law ana thht IN"
giving Of the franchise without compensation j. "a
vnstc and nlnr, 10 the cly and mn Illegal om'la "''
while It's bc,townl was mat cr of COLLISION he'"''"
the Aldermen and John Dclmar, Edwag Fr"cl Ihom''
A. Korfgan. Michael MURPHY, r. II. Flynn anu an
thOny Enrrcit, OF some oil thrih' an" ".''' - ''' "
the plaintiff unknown. The plnintn has "duly ~
qnes ed the defendant tho city u lirooMyh' through
H. Mayor Ia bring. or cause to be Drought M Nuoh
10 declare said pretended franchise null and vo, bn
the .ald defendant ha, failed and neglected 80 10 ao'
Wherefore the plinllh pia,S for Iudgment dc
cafing the laid alleged frnnchs" to be Illegal. nun ana
void aud restraining the defendant the I mon Kan
road Company. from doing any nct or tnhlhG any
stcps townid the ION Oi said railroad over slu
str,cts ana avenues or. II such franchise should De-
valid that the value thereof be appraised ana
determined. and that the individual dcfchdnn = Al
dcrnrn Of the CITY ~ nrUOklNn be adJudged Ia pay
the valnc thereof TO the said city Of BOokyu ana for
such other or further relief may he Just together
with the costs OF this action