The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1896-03-04
POINT OF ROCKS AGAIN
Contempt and sequestration
Proceedings Argued Before
the Court Of Errors.
Special to the Jersey Citp Netrs.

TRENTON, March 4, 1S96.-At the open
ing of the Court of Errors and Appeals
yesterday morning Judges James H.
Nixon and John S. Barkalow, who were
appointed and confirmed Monday even
ing. to succeed Judges Tasman and
Smith, serving ad interim, were sworn
into office by Chancellor McGiIl, in the
presence of the court and the members
of the bar. William l.. Dayton, who
was appointed to succeed Judge Brown,
viii not take his seat until April IS, as
the term of the present incumbent does
not expire until that date.
The morning was consumed in the call
ing of the list and the hearing of ordinary
motions. AT the afternoon session the
court heard arguments in the matter OF
the contempt and sequestration a~djudged
against the Pennsylvania Railroad Com
pany and the United New Jersey Rail-
road and Cana Company for disobeying
the order of the Court of Chancery in
interfering with the workmen on the
National Docks and New Jersey Connect
ing Railway Company. while construct
ing an arch at the Waldo avenue car
yard, in Jersey City.
1t appears that the rival companies
have been at dds in reference to the
manner of constructing the arch in ques-
ton. The National Docks. in August,
1885, paid into court the sum of $4,000,
being the amount of an award eff a jury
for the prospective damages which would
be sustained by the Pennsylvania and
United Companies in he erection, and
entered into possession of the yard. The
workmen of the National Docks, however
were harassed by the throwing of ashes
and water upon them, and finally by the
rolling of large boulders upon the Spot
where they were working. The company
then filed a bill for injunction to prohibit
the interference with the work. and the
Court granted a preliminary injunction
preventing Interference with the cons.ruc-
ton up to the first track in the yard
The case then came up on final heaF1ne
before Vice Chancellor Reed, who granted
as the National Docks did not disturb
more than three tracks at a time. This
decree was daily served, but no injunction
issued upon it. When the decree W.:
served the National Docks proceedec
with the work. but their rivals ran II
upon the tracks at cars laden with greal
boulders of stone. The matter was called
to the attention of the Chancellor. whe
adjudged Superintendent Edward Z
Brooks and the Pennsylvania Company ii
contempt, ana imposed a fine OF SO OF
edCh, ana also directed That Il VIII "
sequestratinn issue to sequester thu
properly in the car yard. IRIS order
was made on February q. On the same
day tie company and its superintendent,
took ali appeal from the contempt anl
sequestrdticn.
The Chancellor in the matter Of the con
tempt, was len:ent with the defendants
as their action was based on the adyic'
of counsel.
The defendants claim that the force .
the decree vas suspended by tive apfea
taken. They claim that Dn:ess a sta.
is marked en- the appeal by the ~'~T.lancei
lor they are in rhe same position afte,
the appeal is taken as if ths decree hat
not been Issued.
The question was also raised as 4
whether M injunction Should nor hael
been issued on tae decree.
The matter was up before the coirt 10
the purpose Of fixing a day fer argument
hut Cc1rseliars Gilbert C2,i.ns and r
Y. Lindaba,v. cor complainant and dc
PENDANTS respectively, incidentally brou@a
up the questions related IN this nara
graph. and the natter will be more full,
argued at tine time when the case j
/ notllo rIU aaltc