The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1913-11-06
Holds That Connecticut College For Women Is An Institution Affected With A High Degree Of Pub
 lie Usefulness
No Such Doubt Attaches To Charter Granted By General Assembly As Warrants Setting It Aside
 As Unconstitutional

ter read in the light of it's history. Allegations in the application, for ex- ample, that the trustees had voted to
 open the doors of the college to all women could not add to or subtract from the terms of the charter. What the trustees do they can undo: what the charter gives remains A college is open co the public on equal terms although admission to it is surrounded by reasonable regula- tions which do not prohibit, in a par tia1 way, the public from the right to enjoy the benefits of the insfnua- tion For example, an examination for admission, or limitation of the number of students would be reason able regulations provided all of the public have the equal opportunity to take" the examination and to be ad- mitted without discrimination. With this interpretation of the
 meaning of ''open to the public on equal terms do not understand my brethren to differ.
 It is my clear conviction that un- der this charter the petitioner is bound to furnish to all woman upon equal terms the higher education pro land sought to be taken IS to be used for this purpose.
 If this conclusion be sound the foundation on which the opinion rests fails.
 Let us now assume, as my .breth- ren hold, that a prerequisit of the grant of eminent domain to The Con necticut College for Women is that the education it provides shall be open to the public. upon equal terms
 With little or no argument the opinion holds, s9There is nothing in the petitioners application or charter to show that the public has or can acquire a right to the benefit of it's corporate purposes" We think a fair and reasonable construction of the charter leads to the conclusion that the education to be furnished by this College will be open to all women of our state upon equal terms.
 It is worth noting that the counsel who have twice argued this question to this Court refrained from making the claim, upon which the opinion rests, but contended that the right of eminent domain was limited to the taking of private property for a gov ernmenta1 purpose which they assert ed was the equivalent of governm ental control, and therefore the constitu- tiona1 inhibition limited the right to take save when done under the con- trol or regulation of the state.
 The opinion holds that government tai purpose as used by it is such use as might properly be administered by the state itself, or by some poIiti- cal subdivision th0reOf.
 These ideas of governmental pur- pose are thus seen to be diametrica1ly opposed. The former has some au- thortty to support it; the latter none which we have found. Each princi- pie acknowledges many exceptions, and all, when analysed, are found to rest upon the public welfare served. And neither makes provision for new public uses, which the changing conditions of society have developed in the past, and are sure to. develop in time to come.
 The Connecticut College for Women was chartered for the sole and excIu- sive purpose of establishing, main taining, and conducting an institution for the higher education of women. The purpose as expressed is not in terms limited to some women, nor to such classes of women as it's board of trustees may select. Its education is for women.
 The, charter does not in terms inn pose upon the trustees the obligation of affording to all women the bene- fits of the institution. Nor does it, in terms, attempt to discriminate against any woman or classes of women. There is nothing in the charter in consistent with the existence of an obligation to furnish it's education to all women.
 It was not necessary that this obli- gation should be imposed in express terms.
 By the every day construction placed upon general language of a similar character in all kinds of char ters, the imposition of such duty would be implied from the general language used.
 In very few of the charters of pri- vate water companies granted by our General Assembly, containing author ity for the exercise of the right of en- inent domain, do we find specified ton that they shall serve the public on equal terms. Unless the lan- guage used necessarily fOrbidS, this duty would be implied.
 By the acceptance and exercise of the power, the corporation implied1y undertakes to serve the public locat- | ed along it's mains and latera1s, with out discrimination, upon equal terms. In other charters granting the right l or eminent do-oain, we find the grant l in general terms. without specified
 ton of a use by the public. This we
 find for example, in the charters of North Branford Light, Water and Power Company, Sp- L., Vol 15, p. i 839; and of Conn. River Co.,, SD. L..
 Vol. 15, D. TIA.
 And this is the, only permissible le- l gal construction of the charter of The | Connecticut College.
 Light & Power Co. vs. Hobbs, 72
 N. H., 531, 537
 In the amendatory act according the 1 corp the power of eminent do-
 main, the General Assembly recited
 that ''the higher education of the wo-
 men of this state is a matter of great ] public concern and that the corpora