Evening journal., 1912-07-19

Special TO THE EVENING JOURNAL I
DOVER, Del, July 19.-The SUI
preme Court of Delaware at noon to-
day handed down a decision declar-
ing constitutional law under which
the dupont boulevard is being con-
structed. The judges held that the
law had been passed by the Legis-
lature in a manner not in conflict
with the Constitution. Chief Justice
Pennewil, Chancellor Curtis and AS
sociate Justices Woolley, Rice and
Boyce sat in the case. Each of the
judges read his individual opinion
setting forth his conclusions as to
the constitutionality of the passage
of the law authorizing the creation
of boulevard corporations, an amend
ment to the General Corporation law.
The court did not determine the mer-
its Of the journal entry doctrine and
!, the enrolled bill doctrine, although
both doctrines were discussed in the
individual opinions of the judges.
Chief Justice Pennewill read the
principal opinion of the court up
holding the constitutionality of the
. boulevard corporations law and deal
i ing with the legal points raised, aside
i from that concerning the passage OF
4 the boulevard corporations bill.
Il The Court decided that the two
4 hundred feet strip of land that could
s be taken for the Boulevard right Of
f way was contemplated for a public
3 use and that the lateral strips must
n be used within reasonable time"
n for the operation Of public utilities If
z the law was to be held constitutional.
+ The court did not set forth what II
would consider a reasonable time.
IL an attempt was to be made to hold
8 the lateral strips-the land not ac-
s tually used for the highway-for an
unlimited time without deyoting It to
y the operation OF public utilities, then
81 the question OF constitutionality could
be raised in the courts. The court
81 held that the law did not contemplate
N holding the land for an unlimited
Il period devoting it to the operation OF
8 public utilities.
The Court held that the DUPONT
ID boulevard Corporation could condemn
"a land up to the two hundred feet width
6 for a right of way for the Boulevard
81 the question of eminent domain being
81 established in favor of the corpor-
q atiou under the law as framed.
The decision Of the court was given
in the case Of Jehu H. Clendaniel, Of
near Lincoln, Sussex county, who re-
s. sisted the attempt to condemn a right
N of way for the boulevard through his
n land. Resident Judge Henry c. Con-
n rad, Of Sussex county, upheld the
right 10 condemn. Mr. Clendaniel ap-
81 pealed on a writ of prohibition TO the
Supreme Court and attacked the con-
81 stitutionality of the boulevard corpor-
81 ations law. He was represented by
Al Henry Ridgely and Caleb S. Layton OF
% Dover The Coleman DUPONT Road
Sc was represented by Robert II. Rich
ards Of Wilmington and Charles w
|& Cullen of Georgetown.
Il is now expected that General du.
Il pont will resume work on the boule.
ward. since the right TO condemn land
.# for a right of way has been deter
81 mined by the highest court of Della
N ware. He suspended road building
~ operations when the constitutionaliiJ
4 of the law was attacked
After reciting the history of the boule
# ward bill and Governor Pennewill's mes
# sage to the Legislature following Gen
eral duPont's offer, the court sets fort
that surveys were made and that Johl
II. Clendsniel challenged the attempt Il
condemn his land by proceedings befor
B Resident Judge Henry c. Conrad of Sus
M sex county, which took the case into tn
X Supreme Court eventually. Then the de
cision takes up the case before the Su
8 preme Court. The decision continues
s. II Il contended that the statute il
& question is in conflict with Section II
6 Article IL, of the Constitution of thi
s state, In that it amends Chapter 81;
d Volume 81, Laws of Delaware, being a
Act entitled An Act Providing a Gener
u al Corporation Law by incorporatin
~ therein provisions not germaine to th
subject OF said chapter and not expresse
& in the title thereof; and also that III
said amendatory act, being Chapter ls
Volume 26, Laws of Delaware is in col
flict with said constitutional provisio
< in that 1t embraces more than one sui
ect.
"The Constitution provide that, N
n bill or joint resolution, except bills al
propriating money for public purpose
shall embrace more than one subiec
which shall be expressed in its title
= "We will consider, therefore, this que
ton: Whether an act authorizing the o
81 ganization OF Boulevard Corporation
would be in conflict with the constitl
tional provisions above mentioned.
"The answer TO this question must d
pend upon the meaning of the VOL
Boulevard What does il embrace
suggesty Certainly much more than
anciently impaired, viz: "A promena,
on demolished fortifcation.' Later
was defined to be "A broad street, pror
enade or walk planted with rows
trees
"In the light of modern conditions Il
word must be given broader signifcan
still. To the popular mind and unde
standing 1t suggests, at least, a broi