Frelinghuysen v. State Highway Comm'n
| Decision Date | 30 October 1930 |
| Docket Number | No. 264.,264. |
| Citation | 152 A. 79 |
| Parties | FRELINGHUYSEN v. STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Certiorari proceeding by Joseph S. Frelinghuysen against the State Highway Commission of the State of New Jersey, to review an order appointing commissioners to appraise lands of prosecutor as necessary to be taken by state for public use in construction of highway.
Order modified and, as modified, affirmed.
Argued January term, 1930, before TRENCHARD, LLOYD, and CASE, JJ.
McDermott, Enright & Carpenter, of Jersey City, for prosecutor.
William A. Stevens, Atty. Gen., George T. Vickers, of Jersey City, and Walter H. Bacon, Jr., of Trenton, for respondent.
The writ of certiorari in this case was allowed by a member of this court to review his order appointing commissioners to appraise the lands of the prosecutor set forth in the petition as necessary and required to be taken by the state of New Jersey for public use in the construction of state highway route No. 29, together with the antecedent proceedings leading up to such order.
It is admitted that tne land involved is not to be used by the state highway commission as part of the highway for public travel, but is acquired for the purpose of eliminating obstacles to the view of travelers on the intersecting highways, the object being the public safety, particularly in the use of the automobile as a present means of transportation.
Three reasons are urged by the prosecutor for setting aside the order: (1) That the commission is without power under the eminent domain law to take lands for such purpose; (2) that the title of the act is not sufficiently broad to confer a power of condemnations; and (3) that the state cannot constitutionally take, as in this case is demanded, all of the right, title, and interest of the prosecutor.
The first two of these contentions we think are without merit. The state of New Jersey has undertaken to establish within its borders a comprehensive scheme of highways adapted and necessary to the full use and enjoyment of modern means of transportation, and to this end in 1917, chapter 14 of the laws of that year (P. L. p. 25), it directed the state highway commission to "as soon as practicable lay out" certain designated routes. It authorized the commission to lay out, open, and improve new roads as well as to utilize and improve existing roads; also to lay out routes in continuation of, connecting with or in addition to the routes specified.
In 1927, chapter 319 was passed (P. L. p. 712). In this act various routes were defined, and the state highway commission was given substantially the same powers as were conferred by the earlier act. In section 111, subdivision e, of this act (P. L. p. 720), the commission is authorized "to do and perform whatever may be necessary or desirable to effectuate the object and purposes of this act," and the statute directs that the powers conferred are to be liberally construed.
In addition to the broad powers conferred by the act, section 118 (P. L. p. 732) provides for the acquisition of land by lease, gift, purchase, demise, or condemnation for any purpose connected with highways, including the removal of obstructions to traffic and to the view and all other things and services necessary or convenient for the performance of the duty imposed by the act, and that in condemnation the proceedings shall be in accordance with the Eminent Domain Act of 1900 (2 Comp. St. 1910, p. 2181).
We live in an age of development in which the advances of science and invention have placed under our control forces of nature which were little dreamed of, much less availed of, by our fathers; most pronounced are those realized in our mode of transportation. The endeavor to keep pace with these developments involves obvious departures from the construction and character of highways that were suitable for the earlier forms of travel. Before the advent of the self-moving vehicle on the road, the element of view at public crossroads was not in public conception deemed of moment. For the safety of the traveling public the speed of the automobile has made a reasonable view of approaching travel as essential as the safe construction of the highway itself. To this end, new and existing roads are straightened, curves are banked, at intersections objects obstructing the view are removed. All of these things are clearly within the legislative scheme of providing safe highways for its own citizens and others from without, and, as we think, as clearly indicated in the powers conferred.
With the second question, namely, the title of the act, we have little difficulty. It is entitled "An Act to establish a State Highway System, and to provide for the improvement, betterment, reconstruction, resurfacing, maintenance, repair and regulation of the use thereof," and to this end in the body of the act sundry routes are established and the state highway commission is given the necessary powers to perform the duties called for by the body of the act.
It is...
To continue reading
Request your trial