Skip to main content

Search the Special Collections and Archives Portal

upr000285 226

Image

File
Download upr000285-226.tif (image/tiff; 34.75 MB)

Information

Digital ID

upr000285-226
    Details

    Rights

    This material is made available to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. It may be protected by copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity rights, or other interests not owned by UNLV. Users are responsible for determining whether permissions are necessary from rights owners for any intended use and for obtaining all required permissions. Acknowledgement of the UNLV University Libraries is requested. For more information, please see the UNLV Special Collections policies on reproduction and use (https://www.library.unlv.edu/speccol/research_and_services/reproductions) or contact us at special.collections@unlv.edu.

    Digital Provenance

    Digitized materials: physical originals can be viewed in Special Collections and Archives reading room

    Publisher

    University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Libraries

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 t use. Th® court suit', "In our judgment however, while i t may have 'been better le g isla tio n to have fixed and limited the p articu lar use fo r which the City/ of Brooklyn was authorized to ac­quire and hold the appellant’ s property, the m t is valid* Throughout i t declares the acquisition to he in the public interest and fo r the public use. The scheme suggests that the le g isla tu re deemed the matter of the water supply of too great public importance to he l e f t to private enter­p rise end i t should become a part o f the great municipal system. le g isla tu re must he presumed tc he the hast judge o f the necessity of public works and improvement®, o f how they sh all he instituted and o f how long they sh all he carried on, so as host to subserve public industry* Of the necessity fo r the exercise o f the right of eminent domain, the legislatu re is the Judge| hut whether the use fo r which the property is to be taken is a public use, which ju s t ifie s it s appropriation is a ju d ic ia l question upon which the courts ere free to decide* The opportunity fo r the presentation of that question and fo r obtaining a ju d ic ia l determination upon i t was d istin ctly provided fo r in the act. Shi act in the f i r s t section declares that ’ the public interest requires the acquisition by fee city of Brooklyn fo r the public use* of the properties o f the water company, and in the next section i t provided fo r the presentation o f a petition at & special term of the Supreme Court, which a fte r setting forth the description of the properties and franchisee and the names o f fee owners or o f the p arties having claims ©r interests therein, should pray ’ that said city may be authorized to take and hold said property and franchises forever fo r the public use, free of a l l lien s and encumbrances upon making a just compensation th erefor’ * * * * * the appellant*a other point as to anconst i tut tonality o f the act i s feat i t authorised condemnation of property which is already devoted to a public use without designating any d iffe ren t or large r public use to which i t 1® to be applied* He do not think that there i s force in th is objection** and then proceeds to make the statement cited in the Misqually case*- in Public Service Company vs City of Loveland, 245 la c . 493, the. supreme Court of the state of Colorado decided that the city was authorized to condemn the e le c tric distributin g cowpany of fee complainant under general statutes authorizing the city so to do. One paragraph o f said statute reads as follows? "Seventieth* Said c it ie s or towns art hereby authorized to condemn, and appropriate so much private property as sh all be necessary fo r the construction and operation o f said water, gas or e ls e t r ie s ! lig h t work® in such manner as may be prescribed by law* Said c ity or town sh all also have the right, to condemn end appropriate any water, gas, or e le c tric lig h t works not owned by such city or towh in such manner as is or may be prescribed by law fo r the condemnation of re a l estate * *