New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-03-21
NEW JERSEY NEWS.
FIERCELY ATTACKED BY THE LACKA-
WANNA. THE JERSEY CENTRAL
AND THE ERIE

! Trenton. March % (SpecaD.-Senator Ketcham's
bill providing for the abolition Of grade crossings
In certain cities Of the State and especially in New
ark. was vigorously opposed by representatives OF
several railroads at a hearing before the Senate
Committee on Railroads and Canals tonight.
The principal argument was made by Flavei Nc
Gee, representing the Delaware. Lackawanna and
Western and the Morris and Essex railroads He
attacked the cons'iutlonallty OF tho proposed act
as being defective in many particulars. The first
section. providing for the raising OF the crossings
where the population exceeds thirty-eght to the
acre. was. he said directly opposed to the title of
the act. This section Is so worded that its meaning
Is almost impossible 70 construe with any degree
OF certainty. It is therefore, impossible to say no"
far-reachlng otherwise it might be. II was also
unconstitutional he contended as special legisla-
ton. In that II makes no provision for cities where
the population Is less dense for other municipa-
ties The law as DRAFTED applies not only 10 me
main streets OF cities affected. but 10 every a,,y
and lane being In this respect. according 10 Mr.
Aic'ite, ehtTey contrary 10 thc "eeI,'s Sr,r..nd
where there IS practically traffic II may be usd
"a a great engine Of oppression against the rail-
roads. .
Mr. MCGEE also attacked the method provided
IN me blll or taxing away inc po"T9I oi "a -
mission which he held &C. be entirely beyond legi1-
u was fundamental principle OF tho Constitution
that property should be taken for any pubic
purpose without just remuneration. yet ne sald
the bin compels the railroads arbitrarily 10 pay %
out any estimate OF benefits conferrcd 1t is faulty.
he said. in making "a second arbitrary provision
FOR keeping the crossings and abutWeuts IN order
1t deprlves the railroads Of the funuamcnlal right
Of trial by Jury 10 assess benefits and Improperly
adds 10 the Jurisdiction Of thr Chancellor, Wlmch
only extends TO the taking OF private property Inc
bill is bad because II contains no scheme Tor money
compensation to the railroads II provides that oheol
the commissioners mentioned must be a resident OF
the city but las provision tor any representato ION
OF the railroads II thus makes man judge
in his own court The bill even goes 50 iar ~ 10
give the commission power 20 order the cnanse or
the location o. i railroad which might result IN a
cost Of millions Of dollars. Finally ne sad. u ~
an unwise and unjust measure. There is not
railroad that WOulu not ne Wiling 10 elevate ltS
tracks but not IN the way proposed
s NJ Williams. e-presdent or the Ne"-JeTsey
Central Railroad. appeared for that company HH
also opposed the bin. adding 20 what Mr. Niece
had said that the real commission created WOULD be
the Mayor and the Board Of Public works, they
having veto power enabling them 10 object 10 any
PROPOSED change until a proposition was mace con-
current with their views. He asked That nothlnS
be done until an opportunity he given TO merchants
of Newark to be heard. II would compel the Jer-
soy Central he said. in places 10 raise its tracks 10
tho second story. thus doing away win us ireleht-
wards Many merchants would thus be injured
lanes s Allen. representin- the Ere system,
characterized the bill as an abortion. Whlch docs
moi follow i'm any line prior legislation or simiiar
kind II was drawn on special ines. he SAID. Win
tbe evident purpose OF striking some special road
whether tho Erie or not he could not say nut "
would be opposed by Ali railroads for TINS reason.
The railroads nc said need no spur or legislation 10
make them elevate their tracks. All they ask ~
fair treatment.