This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1911 edition. Excerpt: ... (People v. U. de D. R. It'. Co., 128 N. Y. 240; People v. A. cf.' V. R. R. Co., 24 N. Y. 261; Dusenbury v. N. Y. lV. (Q C. T. Co., 46 App. Div. 267; N. O. G. L. Co. v. L. L. C0., 115 U. S. 650; Cityof illorristown v. E. T. Tel. C0., 115 Fed. Rep. 304; N. Tel. Co. v. City of Fremont, 99 N. W. Rep. 811; /Steward v. Vil. of Ashtabula, 98 Fed. Rep. 516; Africa v. Bd. of Aldermen, 70 Fed. Rep. 729; Foster v. City of Joliet, 27 Fed. Rep. 899.) The grant by the state accepted by the Lines Company is protected by the constitutional guaranties, and the resolution of the board of estimate and apportionment of April, 1906, was a nullity. (lllayor, ete., v. S. A. R. R. Co., 32 N. Y. 261; N., ete., R. Co. v. IL, ete., R. Co., 102 Va. 795; Fletcfier v. Peak, 6 Oranch, 87; Brgfet v. G. W. R. R. Co., 25 Ill. 310.) The Lines Company has fulfilled every requirement of its charter and every condition of its franchise, and on the merits has not been guilty of nonuser or laches. (People v. R. T. C0., 23 Wend. 222; S._T. cf: T. Co. v. Kearney, 68 App. Div. 283.) Aleacander S. Bacon, Charles 'L. lVYlhrow and Arthur N. Taylor for Great Eastern Telephone Company, intervening. The efiect of the acts of 1885 and 1886, in exercise of the police powers of the legislature, was merely to modify or regulate the relator's franchise, not to destroy or impair. it. (People ea; rel. lV00d/raven v. Deehan, 153 N. Y. 528; J. C., ete., Ry. Co. v. Passaic, 68 N. J. L. 110.) The relator's secondary franchise constitutes property. (People v. 0'Brz'en, 111 N. Y. 1, People em rel. the legislature. (City (fZVew York v. Bryan, 196 N. Y. i 158; S. R. T. Co. v.llayor, eto., 128 N. Y. 510.) A secondary franchise cannot be revoked by the board of..."