New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1906-09-03
WATER FIGHT DUE SOON
Diversion Of States Supply To Be
Considered Again.

lain Dormant during the hot weather But Il
VII assume prominence some time this month
and perhs2s soon the fan term OF the
Court OF Errors and Appeals conyenes. The 6e-
cision Of TIE highest court VIII then be rendered
regarding the diversion OF New Jersey water
20 New YORK. Staten Island anywhere else
cut.ide the state boundaries. II Is known that
eeveral % the judges have prepared opinion
witch s. Is expected win be the decision OF the
,ou~e. Jus;ice MRhlon Pftney Sc understood 20
rs-e ~rst;en the opinion. and Il Is said 10 have
RET The Individual views Of the members OF the
court 70 whom Il has been presented and bv
shon II has been scanned.
Ths ca.e came 10 THE court on appeal rom
4 Decision OF Nioe-C'Aancellor Bergen His de-
cision WAS based On the broaSest grounds He
inserted that me stat. nsd control OF its Great
uros. the oorDorations and sustained the law
forbieeing the diversion o: water, under no mat
TER whit pretence or statute /; IS sought II the
court upholas the Nice-Chancellor. the matter is
almost sure 20 be carried 20 the United States
court. The biz water companies. both here and
in New York have such great interests AZ stake
tnat Trey are not likely % lose them so long as
there is q court OF any kind left that might pos
silly vnder Decision IN their favor. The vast
watershed already existing. and which could be
materially enlarged by the expenditure OF the
necessary amount OF money. furnishes a great
temptation TO capital. and il is believed the
rUorssife means would be eagerly provided n the
legal position OF AFFAIRS was definitely settled.
There IS an Impression, which S. OF course.
merely an oppression. that the Court OF Errors
viii refuse 20 sustain the appeal and will stand
By Mr. Bergen. II is even limited that there
some of tho Judges who have long inclined 20
1he opinion that there are 3 number OF defects In
the water laws Of the state. There are prom
insn; lawyers not on the bench who think the
-, o-Ea sv
mary instances have not been framed under the
proper provisions
There is said TO be exception. and the his
tcry of that transaction is interesting. When
John r Bartlett making the purchase OK
lanes for the big watershed which furnishes
Newark and some adjacent towns with water
his shrewcness led him N perceive that not only
were the rights conferred upon the Society for
tbs Establishment OF Useful Manufactures in
the way OF sccumulsting. storing. etc, the
waters Of the upper part OF the state very vaiu-
sble. but likewise the charter itself. The char
yer was granted early IN the last century by
the Legislature. practically in perpetuity. II
vss prepared by Alexander Hamilton. and en-
acted through his efforts. He charter
member. The plans projected were very extern
siFs and costly. and several times. as original
papers and correspondence. partly in the pos
session OF the East Jersey Water Company and
partly IN the hands OF Mr.. Bartlett show, Mr..
Hamilton had 10 raise money 20 help matters
along and prevent the concern from going into
bankruptcy.
The charter Is absolute and free from outside
interference. IL provides for a government and
a governor over the territory embraced In the
provisions. Probably very few Jerseymen are
aware that under the charter and privileges
corded there are always two Governors in New
Jersey The man elected as Governor OF the
society-and a Governor IS still elected by the
owners OF the property and chsrter-has certain
powers that ne exercise. although there
never has been any friction. far as known,
between the executive az Trenton and the eKecu-
tive whose headquarters are presumed 10 be
Paterson The late Benedict Colt was Gov,
for many years. Mr.. Bartlett and his
sociates purchased tbs charter and paid. IN
round figures. a million dollars for Il. Pending
the negotiations and after half million dollars
hsd been deposited account, the charter and
property OF the company were held by the late
Vioe-President Garrett a. Hobart as trustee Mr..
Hobart was one Of tho numerous counsel Mr..
Bartlett employed while carrying out his ire
nendous enterprises. In due time all the stock
was turned over 10 Dir. Bartlett except a few
shares that could not be and never have been
found, and which have been cancelled Of record.
At the same time the owners Of the Society for
Useful Manufactures offered 10 sell to Bartlett
large amount OF land IN Paterson. but Bartlett
CSC not wish 90 have real estate feature tackled
on 10 his water scheme and declined. The land
was finally divided up a dividend among the
stockholders, ana il Is understood Is very val
uahle embracing some Of the best parts OF Pat
erson. How much Of the land is still held by
the shareholders is not certainly known. but IL
is believed considerable ~ il passed into other
hands. When the East Jersey Water Company
was formed and NJ Partlett turned his entire
EC1T he q
Establishing OF Useful Manufactures went along
What Mr. Bartlett received as his compensation
Is naturally not ciVulged, but IL Is supposed 10
have been satisfactory 10 the eminent water pro-
moteF and expert.
II is asserted that should the court decide
against diversion. the East Jersey Water Com
restrictions placed by the Jersey court. because
the Olo anu unique charter referred
asset az the company would render the company.
under its provisions, free from interference.
The contention would be that the society charter
and It's rights became the property Of its as
signs after the Bartlett purchase, and the pur-
chaser or purchasers and his their assigns
could exercise the privileges granted. How far
this theory would reach is not known. but IL is
understood Bartlett and mis- able corps of attor-
neys believed that 81 extended 10 all the prop
critics belonging 20 them thereafter 10 the
Fast Jersey Water Company. including such
subsidiary concerns as the MOntclair Water
Company the Suburban, etc. That feature Of
the proposition might result IN more litigation.
The question Of the rights Of the federal gov
eminent as compared with the state might come
10. In fact, the coming decision may consider
that possible phase q the controversy II the
New Jersey courts should hold that they can
prevent diversion or water from the state even
az against the powers Of 4 charter such as the
old society conferred. n is easy 10 see that the
East jersey company would waste no Tine in
asking To- construction Of the matter and a
1ecisioa % 80 United States court
Liiiss'.on ~ that ldad would be very tedious
u ceu~-e. Whether pending a final review and
Decision the water company would be enioined
fro-3 selling and diverting any of its water sup