New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-12-31
AGAINST THE TROLLEYS.
u1DGE DEpUE REFUSES TO QUASI THE
INDICTMENTS.

HE SAYS THAT THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO TRANS
PORT FRErGHr-wHILE ADMITTING THAT
SOME OF THE COUNTS ARE WEAK. HE SAYS
TIE COMPANIES MUST STAND TRIAL
Judge Depue. in Newark. yesterday, refused 10
ouash the indictments against the Consolidated
Traction Company and the Newark ana south
Orange Street Railway Company.
Joseph Coult counsel for the railroad companies
argued that the indictments were defective. The
railroads he said. had been run for nearly quar-
ter Of a century. and for five years or so they hau
been controlled and operated by the companies
Speaking OF the Beeville Indictments. In which 1t
was charged that the Consolidated Traction COM
pany INSTRUCTED Washingtonave by putting up
poles and wires Mr. Coult insisted that the company
had authority 70 do that for which II had been IN
dcted by the General Tire Htion act OF lss3 MT count
declared that the Bclleville line was operated by
virtue of a charter. and that he could show, by
long chain Of titles the corporation right to operate
the road The company, he said. had also the right
to use any motive power except steam
Taking up the count charging the two companies
with unlawfully and njuriously carting ashes coai
iron. etc. Mr.. Coult contcnded that the companies
were authorized to transport not only passengers
but property. The Legislature in specific terms, he
said had said that the companies might Use cleo
tricty Back in 1856 the Legislature authorized the
use of electricity motive power with the consent
of the local authorities He explained that the con-
sent Of the local authorities had been obtained long
ago.
Prosecutor Crane argued in support Of the indict-
ments He referred the indictments for the Sciz-
ure OF the streets in Bellevile and rdiculed the
claim that nothing that was illegal had been al
legged In the indictments II made no difference, he
dividual that used the streets for an unlawful pur-
pose If the act done was Illegal, then 1t became
a common nuisance, and as such, the wrongdoer
might be indicted. =,
Mr. Crane arguing that the companies had
no right transport ashes. etc. when Judge Depue
said "The General Traction act does not allow
power to transport passengers and freight Or every
description. and the words goods and chattels are
used--the words in that section referred TO being
the same "a those used in common law when
freghter Is defined The question is too plain for
restricting the OF the roads is quite clear. and
the legal authorities might qualify their consent :
Mr. Crane insisted that the companies must first
obtain consent of the local authorities The city
In fact they restricted the companies from carrying
freight. The only question was whether or not the
companies have the right TO use the streets Tor the
things which charged as offences, Mr.. Nc
Carter declared for the companies, that the COM
panes did not go out Of their way. and that there
thing charged against the Defendants
was needed from the local authorities except for
lines.
The Judge In deciding the said that the trolley
companies had right to occupy any street except
the corporations were organized under a general
law. The averment was that the company. under
the common law definition Of nuisance. had used
the streets. Some OF the counts in some OF these
Indictments are very questionable. perhaps said
the Judge but the practice IS that II one count in
indictment is good not to quash the other counts,
of the cause by instruction to the jury. The Court
thinks that the motions to quash In all these cases
ought not be granted. The motions are denied"
No time was fixed for the trial.