Five Mile Beach weekly journal., 1921-02-11

tue MOTIFS CAnai. lne 6Lale WAFER
Supply Commission aud the city
officials of Newark aud jersey City
have united 10 secure action by the
Legislature to sbAndou the Morris
Canal, principally because of litigation
affecting the water supplies Of both Of
these cities v hich is now peudiug In
the courts, brought by the Lehigh
Valley Railroad Conn any, the lessee
of the Morris Canal.
The Morris Canal has been practically
abandoned for thirty years. and Ia
Jer-ey City and Newark the canal is
virtually a nuisance. The ted OF the
canal, however, in these two cities and
as far a. Paterson is believed to have
great value for other publ C purposes,
such as a trolley, a railroad or a sub
way. The rights of the Morris Canal
to divert the waters of Lake Hopstcong
and Greenwood Lake, aud several
other streams, interfere with the plans
II jersey City and Newark in develop
ing their Iesl ective water supply sys-
TENS for the future. Many other North
jersey municit alities which receive
their supplies of vat, from the =, me
general sources are likewise affected in
the same way. These very i'm portant
public interests therefore require that
this canal, which has been so long
abandoned in fact, shall be legally
abandoned and devoted to other ad.
v%antageous uses.
Frank H. Sommer, of Newark,
counsel Of the North Jersey District
Water Supply Commission, Jerome Il.
CongletoD, corporation counsel of
Newark, John Million, corporation
counsel of Jersey City, and George l..
Record, special counsel for Jersey City,
have prepared a plan for the abandon
ment of the canal and Its acquisition
by the State, and have agreed upon q
report ~embodylng a plan and a bill for
the solution of the Morris Canal
problem.
The report recites the fact that the
canal has Teen for many years aban-
doned in fact as a water way, and that
in Jersey City and Newark it is q
nuisance, and that the bed of the canal
is available for very valuable public
uses, such as a belt line railroad In
Jersey City to accommodate factories,
and for a rapid speed subway electric
passenger line in Newark, and for an
line for bringing water from the Passaic
watershed to the municipalities Of
North Jersey.
The report recommends that the bill
to be introduced should be confined to
authorizing the State to take over the
canal as 1t now stands by coudemna-
ton, leaving the ultimate disposition
OF the various parts of the canal to be
the subject of legislation after the canal
shall have been acquired. This recon-
mendation is based upon the fact that
the disposition of the various parts Of
the canal property is sure to lead 10
more Oh less differences Of opinion, and
these differences prevent the union of
the forces necessary to secure condem-
nation.
The attitude of the Lehigh Valley
Railroad Company, lessee of the canal,
is set forth in q letter annexed to the
report, in which the company says that
they are willing to have the canal
abandoned provided they are allowed
to keep the canal bed In the cities of
Jersey City and Phillipsburg for rail-
road purposes. and that they are un-
willing to pay any sum whatever to
the State, because the company argues
that by the abandonment they are
turning over to the State extremely
valuable property. The answer to this
position is that the company has in its
previous attempts to secure the aban-
donment Of the canal formally offered
the sum of $500, 600 as a consideration,
and those in charge of the bill at TIen-
ton have publicly stated that the COM
pany was willing to pay several times
this amount to C the abandonment
of the canal. The values of the prop
erty mentioned in the letter of the
Lehigh Valley Railroad Company are
values which the Canal Company and
the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company
do not possess. The property in their
hands is valueless. The great value
comes from the change of the use, and
that value will be created by the Legis-
lature, and therefore it belongs to the
people aud not to the Lehigh Valley
Railroad Company.