New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1906-02-15
NORRIS CANAL HEARING
MANY FOR PRINCE BILL.
Greenwood Lake Opposed-Fred-
erick ". Kelsey Speaks.

Morris Canal The bills under conslue1dtlOii
were those OF Mills. of Morris. a duplicate OF
last years measure. and Prince, Of Passaic'
which was drawn by Cortlandt Parker and pro-
vides for the forfeiture of the charter. Green
wood Lake and Lake Hopatcong We're repre-
seuted by Hunter, the Edwards and others,
while some OF the prominent lawyers whose
faces were familiar In former years appeared
for various corporations. The last favored the
Mills bill
Attorney General McCarter listened 10 some
OF the arguments.
The Prince bill was taken up first Petitions
were offered by c. T. Richardson, with $4,000
signers from al counties but Atlantic He told
Of a trip he had made along the towpath Of the
canal. He found everything broken down and
desolate and in some cases the water had been
allowed TO overflow, 70 the damage Of adjacent
property In some places IL was necessary TO
so around for a mile and a half before the tow
path could be reached. The Rev. Adoph Roeder,
Of the Civic League Of Orange, presented brief
in favor Of the bill He argued that the inter
est of the entire state should be considered and
not the pecuniary and selfish purposes Of a rail-
road Abandonment should not take place IN
less the State was 10 be benefited.
Charles y Stewart, OF Paterson, wanted the
Prince bill passed in the water interests OF his
county stephen A Condict, Of the New-Eng-
land Society said if the canal was not being
operated according 20 its charter the present
lessees and owners should be punished The de-
tails could be arranged afterward- If the cor
poratfon had not fulfilled its obligations II
should be brought before a court OF Justice and
compelled TO do its duty, he argued
DIT Kinney, Of Newark, told how he obtained
the signatures Of the hundreds Of people in
Washington. Stewartsville. Dover and other
places without any trouble in favor OF the
maintenance Of the canal Dr.. George L Rusby.
Of Nutey. said the problem was how 10 serve
the State on the one hand and 90 justice TO the
Lehigh Valley Railroad on the other He
thought the Mills bill meant that luscious
melon" was 10 be cut.
He charged that the Miller bill was one OF the
most unblushing attempts 70 defraud the State.
He said the Lehgh Valley had done more 10
generate a socaIstic spirit than a host of So
ciaIistic orators Prince asked for an adjourn
ment until next Tuesday, that Cortlandt Par
ker. who was now sick. might be heard.
William H Corbin. counsel FOR the Lehigh
Valley. objected. He said year after year the
hearings were adjourned from week 10 week
and then the session ended and nothing was
done
Assemblynan Miller, one Of the committee,
ton said:
CortlandL Parker IS one of the most eminent
men il the State. He was recently honored by
the entire bar Of New-Jersey. To refuse him
a hearing or 20 suggest that he be prevented
from speaking should not be tolerated for a
minute.
This speech was greeted with tremendous ap-
plause. Mr.. Corbin fastened 10 say that he in
tended no reflection upon Mt Parker, whom he
hipEfx 70
ing 10 90 On as speedily as possible It was
finally agreed the hearing should proceed after
the afternoon session and then adjourn until
next Tuesday, when Nj Parker would speak
The episode did not help the Lehigh Valley side
Of the case. however. IN the estimation Of those
present.
FREDERICK X. KELSEY SPEAKS
The hearing was resumed after adjournment
this afternoon. Frederick ". Kelsey said he
believed public sentiment was Overwhelmingly
In favor OF The Parker bill He and his friends
We're here, not paid attorneys, but as plain
citizens. IN the interests OF the people The
Parker bill was in the right direction, while the
Mills bill was retrogressive and in the wrong
direction, re denounced the lobby in the in
terest Of the Lehigh Valley bills. He spoke in
part Is follows.
The provisions and objects Of the two bills under
consideration are directly al variance They differ
I07 Tie civic Fe5eTation or Parker hin 80 raI7s9
as introduced by Nj Prince, baZes the linleliEht
m wrongs e ot6eI Ho 81 te MiIIs iii Dr e e
arently yelled in the obscurtty Of concealed intent
even greater loss and injury 10 the state than have
The lines are therefore clearly drawn. Even
casual reading Of the measures makes this per
fectly clear. The provisions Of the Morris Canal
confirm this conviction The concusion E rrasSff
DIE mat one lll IS drawn the
terests The other directly for the advantage and
As this underlying condition becomes manifest
the alignment for and against each bill is once
allied special interests. with thelr agents LOBBYISTS
nIgloleFs ana eItoFneys and comparatively few
ne principles and general provisions OF the Mills
vance Who Believe Shf he bonor interest I5 70 ao
the state should be protected and maintained and
under chartered privileges should Be held account
able, or Justly punished and not rewarded will as
the potential Facts OF this important subject are
The original charter Of the Morris Canal Com
paIy was clear and explicit The intent was 10
Do- coIserZ and protect the interests OF the State
A. large The people OF New-Jersey Is IN reality
Intended that the State should become the servant
lion or determination OF the interests between the
state and the company
FATE OF THE COAL COMBINE"
The fate Of the coal combine legislature ana
ne party back q IL a sozen years ago, has been
unheeded or perslstently ignored. The arts and
terests back Of them have been resorted to. The
simple question OF the fuhlment Of an obligation.
ne "iItuI reputation OF II. with the Canal
SSt t.1. has been befogged IN order that some
- sf 1Ile ns1l Ds induced to Join IN the warcry
an the attempted conflscatiou OF
I-5 Tlshts OF ne public BY legislative authority.
Ee-tlesl conventions have been made 10 do their
part 10 help the scheme along The findings of a
commission composed OF eminent men have been
And nov have the Milis bill. in most Of it's
biIIs s1,-,7 a. -. 81 me previous corporation