Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

Statement of the Case.

“(7) That ‘The Hoboken Land and Improvement Company' was incorporated by the legislature of said State by an act entitled 'An act to incorporate the Hoboken Land and Improvement Company,' approved February 21, 1838; that by

1 of the act they were authorized to hold real estate, but the amount held by the company should not exceed 1000 acres at any time; that by the fourth section the company was empowered to purchase, fill up, occupy, possess, and enjoy all land covered with water fronting and adjoining the lands that might be owned by them, and to construct thereon wharves, piers, and slips, and all other structures requisite or proper for commercial and shipping purposes, provided that it should not be lawful for the company to fill up any such land covered with water, nor to construct any dock, pier, or wharf immediately in front of the lands of any other person or persons own ing down to the water, without the consent of such persons first had in writing.

"(S) That by virtue of the powers and privileges of said act of incorporation the company purchased all the land and real estate described in the deed of conveyance from Edwin A. Stevens and others, bearing date May 6, 1839, and duly recorded in the clerk's office of the county of Bergen, in Liber 13 of Deeds, fol. 105, and in which, among other land, is included the tract of 564 acres embraced in the Loss map, and formerly the property of Col. Stevens.

"(9) That at the time of said transfer by Edwin A. Stevens and others to the said Hoboken Company the land for which these suits were brought by the city of Hoboken was under water, and since the date of said conveyance has been filled up, occupied, and possessed by said company or their grantees, and that all of said land under water was in front of and adjoining the real estate purchased by the company; that since the time of said purchase the company, or their grantees, have at various times reclaimed the land from the water and have constructed thereon wharves, harbors, piers and slips, and other structures requisite or proper for commercial purposes, and have been in the exclusive possession, occupancy, and enjoyment of the same from the time of such reclamation.

Statement of the Case

"(10) That the city of Hoboken was incorporated by the legislature of the State of New Jersey, by an act approved March 28, 1855, with the powers and privileges therein granted, prout the same, and that the territorial limits of the said city embraced all the lands shown on the Loss map, and also a large tract of real estate adjoining the same on the west, extending to the west line of the lands of the late John G. Coster, deceased, and that previous to said incorporation its territory embraced (a portion of) one of the townships of the county of Hudson.

"(11) That the city of Hoboken never by ordinance recognized River Street south of Third Street, and only recognized its existence as far south as Third Street by the ordinance of January 9, 1858; that Newark, First and Second streets were never recognized by ordinance east of Hudson Street prior to the ordinance of October 5, 1875, which ordinance provided that said streets should extend to high-water mark on the Hudson River; and that Third Street was never recognized east of River Street prior to the said ordinance of October 5, 1875, which ordinance also provided that the said street should extend to high-water mark of said river.

"(12) That no proceedings have been taken by the city to condemn the lands in controversy or to take them for the purposes of a public street, except the passage of the ordinance of 1875 and the bringing of these actions of ejectment claiming the dedication of the lands as a public street under the Loss map of 1804.

"(13) That the Hoboken Land and Improvement Company, -in consideration of $68,583.33, executed a deed to the Camden and Amboy Railroad Company, dated December 1, 1864, conveying a tract of land at the foot or easterly end of Second Street, within the boundaries of which are embraced the premises that the plaintiff seeks to recover in the two suits against the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, and that the Camden and Amboy Railroad Company and its grantees or lessees have been in the possession of said lands since said conveyance.

"(14) That the legislature of the State of New Jersey, by a law approved March 31, 1869, authorized the united railroad

Statement of the Case.

companies of New Jersey to reclaim and erect wharves and other improvements in front of any lands then owned by them or held in trust for them on any tide-waters of the State, and when so reclaimed and improved to have, hold, possess, and enjoy the same as the owners thereof, subject only to the provisions that they should pay for such grant unto the treasury of the State the sum of $20,000 before the first day of July next ensuing, and should also file in the office of the Secretary of the State a map and description of the lands under water in front of the upland designated in said act; that the sum of $20,000 was paid by the companies within the time limited and the map and description filed as required. Exhibit D 9.

"(15) That an act of the legislature of New Jersey, supplementary to the act to ascertain the rights of the State and of riparian owners in the lands lying under water, approved April 11, 1864, was passed on the thirty-first of March, 1869; that by a proviso to the third section of the same 'all previous grants of lands under water or right to reclaim made directly by legislative act or grant or license power or authority so made or given to purchase, fill up, occupy, possess, and enjoy lands covered with water fronting or adjoining lands owned by the corporation, grantee, or licensee named in the legislative act mentioned, its, his, or their representatives, grantees, or assigns,' are excepted from the operation of said supplement; that in the fourth section of said act the riparian commissioners are authorized, for the consideration therein mentioned, to execute and deliver in the name of the State of New Jersey, to all persons coming within the terms of said proviso, a paper capable of being acknowledged and recorded, conveying and confirming to them the title to all lands, whether then under water or not, which were held by previous legislative grant or lease, either in the hands of the grantees or lessees or by their representatives or assigns.

"(16) That under the provisions of said act the State of New Jersey conveyed to the Hoboken Land and Improvement Company, by deed dated December 21, 1869, for the consideration of $35,500, so much of the land and premises purchased of Edwin A. Stevens and others as was originally below the

Statement of the Case.

high-water mark of the river, and all lands under water in front of the same, and as was situate between Second and Fourth streets, if extended, and in front of Third Street, if extended, to the exterior bulkhead and pier lines established by the riparian commissioners, and embracing the premises claimed in the several suits against the Hamburg-American Steam Packet Company and the North German Lloyd Steamship Company, and that the said company and its grantees have been in the possession of said premises since the date of said conveyance.

"(17) That on the twenty-sixth of September, 1866, the Hoboken Land and Improvement Company and Edwin A. Stevens executed a conveyance to the New York Floating Dry Dock Company for certain lots and tracts of land, above and under water, in front of and to the east of First Street, and the northerly half of Newark Street, if extended, embracing the premises claimed in the suits against Adolph E. Schmidt and others; that the said The New York Floating Dry Dock Company transferred the same to Frederick Kuhne, trustee of the German Transatlantic Steam Navigation Company, by deed dated August 31, 1872, the said Kuhne, on the same day, executing a formal declaration of trust to the said company; that on the ninth of November, 1872, the State of New Jersey, in consideration of $22,625, granted and conveyed to said Kuhne, trustee as aforesaid, all the right and title of said State in and to the land and premises described in the above recited deed from the Hoboken Land and Improvement Company to the New York Floating Dry Dock Company, and that the same has been in the possession of the said respective grantees from the date of the respective conveyances.

"(18) That on the twenty-third of April, 1872, the Hoboken Land and Improvement Company made a conveyance to the North German Lloyd Steamship Company of a lot of land situate in front of and to the east of Third Street, if continued to the Hudson River, and embracing the premises claimed in the several suits against the North German Lloyd Steamship Company and the Hamburg-American Packet Company, and the premises have been in the possession of said company and its iessees since the date of said conveyance.

Statement of the Case.

"(19) That River Street, as shown on the Loss map, cannot be extended to reach the navigable waters of the Hudson River without crossing land outside of that shown on said map and without crossing land which, prior to April 28, 1874, belonged to the State of New Jersey, and which the said State, by deed of that date, leased in perpetuity to the Morris and Essex Railroad Company. See Exhibit D 8."

Upon these facts the Circuit Court founded its conclusions of law, as follows:

"(1) That neither Col. John Stevens, in 1804, nor at any time thereafter, nor his grantees of any portion of the land delineated on the Loss map, had power to dedicate to the public use as a highway any part of the land or water adjoining said lands and lying east of and below high-water mark of the river as it then existed, and that said land under water belonged to the State of New Jersey, and could only be dedicated or subjected to an easement by the State and its grantees.

"(2) That the charter granted by the State of New Jersey to the Hoboken Land and Improvement Company was a contract between the State and the corporators; that the fourth section expressly authorized the corporation to fill up all lands covered with water fronting and adjoining the lands they might acquire, and to construct thereon wharves, harbors, piers, and slips, and all other structures requisite or proper for commercial or shipping purposes, and that the only restriction imposed upon the corporation by the act was that it should not fill up or build any dock, pier, or wharf upon any land under water 'immediately in front of the lands of any other person or persons owning down to the water;' and that neither the plaintiff in these suits nor the State of New Jersey nor the public was another person owning down to the water,' within the legal meaning and intent of said charter or contract.

"(3) That the provisions of the charter of incorporation of the plaintiff, so far as they are applicable to the subject of the pending controversy, negative the plaintiff's construction of its powers under said charter, in that (1) it withholds from

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »