The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1902-06-13


Plank Road Company then assumed the
attitude that they were not compelled to
maintain the road except for their own
purposes They, said Mr.. Mum, put II.
a new draw Then followed long negotia-
tiops between the Traction Company and
She counties as to the road, but nothing
came Of it. Hudson took the ground thai
they mad no funds to purchase the roaa
nor any statutory power to raise the
money.
Hudson" said Mr.. Mum, wouldn't {
do anything, didn't want to do anythins
and didn't do anything. modus vivanoi
was then reached. Now comes the act OF
1902 and the two important things IN y
are:-First the Legislature undertakes
that this road shall not fall to pieces put
sail be treated as a continuous hign
way Secondly, it undertakes to say that
it is the duties of the counties throush
which the continuous highway extends
to maintain it. This is a new theory in
troduced into the Legislature Of New Jer-
sey where a continuous highway passes
through several municipalities that it de-
wolves on them to maintain it.
1T was utterly" said Mr.. Munn, I'M
possible under the act of 1901 to do any
thing because Hudson didn't want to DO
ANYTHING and had no use for the road but
by this act of 1902 the duty of maintaining
the road is put on the two counties. Tife
time for the expiration of the agreement
is nearly at an end and our friends of the
Plank Road Company say that after tnat
time unless something is done they VIII
take up the planks of the road. leaving
only the rails to make it impossible for
teams. We want this apportionment set
tied and that is the whole situation.
..The road is still being used by teams
and the trolley road?" asked the Court.
Eyes, sir said the lawyer.
County Counsel John Griffin objected to
Mr.. Munn's statement about the owner
ship of the road It was private prop
erty. AS to Hudson refusing to agree,
it ought to be said, when only ten per
cent of the traffic over the road belonged
to Hudson The act of 1901 attempted to
impose on Hudson more than its share. !
1.-The act was dishonest. said Mr..
Griffin. '"Fhe act of 1902 raised very
different situation. Hudson County has
been always ready to meet Essex and
dSISc- we liiAh6 " pay a r1sAtA 49,
portion of the road. but Essex County
has the lions share of the road and hasn't
done anything toward solving this mat
ter. Essex has never been fair in this
question. 1 think it is the duty of Essex
to make its proposition since the bulk
of the traffic on the road is caused by it :"
do you mean to set up that there had
been no effort made to agree on the part
of Essex County?' asked the Vice Chan
cellor.
mo, sir. I am merely stating the facts.
We are willing in Hudson to bear our
share and no more. If Mr. Mum will
state what Essex County proposes to do
I'll agree to proceed to a hearing. I do
so to draw from the other side what their
view is" said Mr.. Griffin
.'The stand which Essex county takes
is not that the apportionment should be
made on territorial basis; they recognize
the proposition set up by the Legislature
that this is continuous highway. Terri
torial bass is one thing and use of the
highway is another" replied Mr.. Mum.
THE County of Essex has not attempted
to dispute the fact that the bulk of the
traffic over the road is for the convenience
of Essex and this fact will be one of the
equities to be treated in the settlement
of the case. This much car, say.
'Oh. well.' said the Vice Chancellor.
''if you gentlemen can get together it
seems to me that you can perhaps settle
this and it will be a great relief to the
Court of Chancery to have the matter off
its hands,
Mr.. Griffin said that he was perfectly
willing to meet Essex in settlement, but
he would like Mr.. Mum to state what
proportion of the traffic was borne by
each county and Essex's proposition in
relation thereto
Then" said the Vice Chancellor, rub
bing his hands and smiling. suppose you
two gentlemen retire and confer and we
will take a recess"
This was done. Mr.. Griffin and Mr..
Mum going into the smaller court room.
They invited the counsel for the Plank
Road Company to join them. When they
returned, after an absence of half an
hour. Mr. Griffin said that on his part
he admitted that the two boards of Hud-
son and Essex having had the oppor-
tunity to meet and agree as to appor-
tionment had failed to agree.
DO you eoncede that?" asked the
Court.
.sTo save time. Yes replied Mr.. Griffin.
"Then," replied the Court to the stem
ographer, "enter that on the record Z
This admission meant that the confer
ence had failed to settle the differences
and the suit must be threshed out in
court
The Vice Chancellor then turned to
Counselor James B. vredenburgh, for the
North Jersey Street Railway Company
and Newark Plank Road, now admitted
as parties to the suit, and asked his
views on the jurisdictional question
raised by Mr.. John. Griffin that apportion-
ment should follow acquisition of the
property. Before Mr.. vredenburgh re-
Piled, Mr. Mum read the temporary
agreement of the companies with the
counties.
what is your position?' asked the
Court of Mr.. vredenburgh. DO you
think the Court has jurisdiction. or has
it not? don't want these counties te
enter into litigation and then find the