The sun., 1900-05-30
No Decision Yesterday by Chan
cellOr in Matter of Railway
Restraining Order.
ANSWER OF PEOPLES co.
Wilmington City Railway Company
Still Claims to Have an .EXcIus-
i've Right to the Streets ofThis
City Through Its Origi-
nal Charter.

The Peoples Railway Company made
a strong fight before the chancellor yes
terday against the restraining order Sc.
cured sometime ago by the Wilmington
City Railway Company preventing it
from laying tracks on Sixth street and
numerous other streets. The entire day
was taken up with argument and it was
after . O'Clock when the argument was
finally completed. Court was then ad-
journed until today.
Willard salisbury represented the City
Railway Company, and William S.
Hilles and Benjamin Nields, the Peoples
Railway Company. +. j. Moore, vice
president of the City Railway Company,
and Richard Crook, the general manager
oil the new company, were in court,
The City Railway in its bill still main
tains its claim of exclusive right and
privilege of building and operating
street railway within the limits of the
city.
Section Of the bill says that under
color of the provisions of an act of the
General Assembly entitled "An act pro.
viding General Corporation Law" a
company known as Peoples Railway
Company has attempted to acquire rights
and franchises to build certain city
railways; that the alleged charter OF
the said Peoples Railway Company is
illegal and void as is also the pretended
consent obtained from the Street and
Sewer Department, and does not au-
thorize or empower it to build rail-
way in the city, and moreover impairs
the obligation OF the contract between
the City Railway and the State of Della
ware.
Section says the new lines will be
competing lines OF the City Railway and
cannot but lessen the tolls, traffic and
income OF the City Railway to its ire
parable damage and injury. Attention
is drawn to danger OF accident by reason
OF the two roads crossing at street inter-
sections.
Mr.. Salisbury read affidavits of II. w.
Wiley, secretary OF the Street and Sewer
Department, General Manager Joseph G.
Lugar, President j. A. Rigg, Secretary
Thomas s. Be!lah and Director III. @.
Moore of the City Railway.
Mr.. Salisbury in his argument said
the complainar t claims as vested right,
SO long as its charter is unrevoked. the
exclusive right and privilege of building
street railways in Wilmington under its
original charter of 1864. He took up the
position in law of the complainant June
10, 1897, when the present Constitution
became effective. He quoted the chan
cellor's decision in the Brandywine
Springs case when he announced the col
clusion that the City Railway Company
, possesses the exclusive right of building
and operating city railway in Will
: mington. The new Constitution assigns
! the revocation of charters to the judicia
-. side OF the government. He alleged tha
q there had been no direct revocation O
! any right of the complainant and that
the General Incorporation Act applies tt
the whole State and itself gives ID,
I withholding from others the exclusive
use OF streets to those who had occupied
them for street railways prior to its pass
age.
He held that there was no authort,
IN the statutes of this State authorizinl
the formation of street railway compa
4 MES, that is companies to build city rail
:. ways longitudinally through and alon,
= = city streets. He claimed that section
ll3 Of the incorporation act referred onl
: to crossings.
Mr.. Hilles presented the answer of tn
:, Peoples Railway Company. The com
panv denies that the City Railway is il
: any wav authorized to use electricity t
: propel its cars or that it has met tn
public demand for transportation withi
the city. The alleged exclusive right i
held to apply only to the road from tn
w. u B. station to Front and Market
to Tenth and along Delaware avenue t
or near Clayton street. A large portio
" OF the lines of railway operated by tn
II City Railway are alleged to be operate
: under charters other than it's own
y denies that the State Of Delaware liza
II ever entered into an irrevocable contrac
e with the complainant or that it has a
9gains. the defendant ar excIusiG