People v. Adirondack Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 03 October 1899
• Citation: 160 N.Y. 225,54 N.E. 689
• Parties: PEOPLE v. ADIRONDACK RY. CO. et al.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

160 N.Y. 225

54 N.E. 689

PEOPLE

v.ADIRONDACK RY. CO. et al.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Oct. 3, 1899.

Appeal from supreme court, appellate division, Third department.

Action by the people of the state of New York against the Adirondack Railway Company and others to enjoin defendant railway company from taking, by condemnation proceedings, any part of the lands described in the complaint for the purpose of its railway. From an order of the appellate division (56 N. Y. Supp. 869) reversing a judgment of the special term (54 N. Y. Supp. 682) for plaintiff, the latter appeals. Reversed.

Edward Winslow Paige, for the People.

Lewis E. Carr, for respondent.

VANN, J.

In 1882 the Adirondack Railway Company was incorporated for the term of 1,000 years, to construct and operate a railroad from Saratoga Springs to the river St. Lawrence, near the city of Ogdensburg. It was a reorganization of an older corporation known as the ‘Adirondack Company,’ which was organized in 1863, under the provisions of chapter 236 of the Laws of that year. Prior to the foreclosure which resulted in the reoganization, the Adirondack Company had constructed a railroad from Saratoga Springs to North Creek, in the county of Warren, and this railroad, together with the right to extend the same, became the property of the Adirondack Railway Company, which, in April, 1892, applied to the railroad commissioners for a certificate, under chapter 565 of the Laws of 1890, to relieve it from the statutory obligation of extending its lines, and, on the 9th of May following, the commissioners issued their certificate accordingly. The Adirondack Railway Company, thenceforth called the ‘defendant,’ made no attempt to extend its road until the early part of 1897, when a survey was made for a proposed extension from North Creek through the counties of Warren, Hamilton, and Essex, to the outlet of Long Lake, in Hamilton county, where it was expected that, by connecting with other roads, a route would be secured to the St. Lawrence river. Before anything further was done to extend the road, certain action, taken by the state, should be briefly alluded to.

In 1885 the forest preserve was created by statute, embracing ‘all the lands now owned, or which may be hereafter acquired, by the state of New York within’ certain counties, and the area was extended by subsequent legislation. Laws 1885, c. 283; Laws 1887, c. 639; Laws 1893, c. 332. These acts required said lands to be forever kept as wild forest lands, and provided that they should not be sold, leased, or taken by any corporation, public or private. A forest commission, with appropriate powers, was created to care for the forest preserve, and appropriations were made from time to time to enable it to properly discharge its duties. In 1890 the forest commission was authorized to ‘purchase lands so located, within such counties as include the forest preserve, as shall be available for the purposes of a state park’; and in 1892 the Adirondack Park was established, and placed under the control of said commission. Laws 1890, c. 37; Laws 1892, c. 707. The revised constitution, which went into effect on the 1st of January, 1895, provides that ‘the lands of the state, now owned or hereafter acquired, constituting the forest preserve as now fixed by law, shall be forever kept as wild forest lands. They shall not be leased, sold or exchanged, or be taken by any corporation, public or private, nor shall the timber thereon be sold, removed or destroyed.’ Const. art. 7, § 7. In 1895 the legislation relating to the forest preserve and the Adirondack Park was extended by the fisheries, game, and forest law, and it was declared, by section 290, that ‘such park shall be forever reserved, maintained and cared for as ground open for the free use of all the people for their health and pleasure and as forest lands necessary to the preservation of the head waters of the chief rivers of the state, and a future timber supply; and shall remain part of the forest preserve.’ Laws 1895, c. 395, §§ 270, 295. During the same year the forest commission was authorized to purchase 80,000 acres for the use of the Adirondack Park. Laws 1895, c. 561. In 1897 an act was passed, the object of which, according to its title, was ‘to provide for the acquisition of land in the territory embraced in the Adirondack Park, and making an appropriation therefor.’ Laws 1897, c. 220. By this act the appointment of a forest preserve board was authorized, and it was made its duty ‘to acquire for the state, by purchase or otherwise, land, structures or waters, or such portion thereof in the territory embraced in the Adirondack Park, as defined and limited by the fisheries, game and forest law, as it may deem advisable for the interests of the state.’ Section 3 of said act provides that ‘the forest preserve board may enter on and take possession of any land, structures and waters in the territory embraced in the Adirondack Park, the appropriation of which in its judgment shall be necessary for the purposes specified in section 290 of the fisheries, game and forest law, and in section 7 of article 7 of the constitution.’ It is provided by the next section that ‘upon the request of the forest preserve board an accurate description of such lands so to be appropriated shall be made by the state engineer and surveyor, or the superintendent of the state land survey, and certified by him to be correct, and such board or a majority thereof shall indorse on such description a certificate stating that the lands described therein have been appropriated by the state for the purpose of making them a part of the Adirondack Park; and such description and certificate shall be filed in the office of the secretary of state. The forest preserve board shall thereupon serve on the owner of any real property so appropriated a notice of the filing and the date of filing of such description, and containing a general description of the real property belonging to such owner which has been so appropriated; and from the time of such service, the entry upon and appropriation by the state of the real property described in such notice for the uses and purposes above specified shall be deemed complete, and thereupon such property shall be deemed and be the property of the state. Such notice shall be conclusive evidence of an entry and appropriation by the state.’ Section 4. Provision is made by the next section for the payment for lands so taken, and for damages resulting from the appropriation, by agreement with the owner, and the delivery of a certificate payable by the state treasurer upon the warrant of the comptroller. Section 5. If the forest preserve board is unable to agree with the owner upon the value of the property appropriated, the owner, within two years after the service upon him of the notice of appropriation, may present a claim for the value of the land to the court of claims, which has jurisdiction to hear and determine the same and to render judgment thereon. The amount of the final judgment is payable to the treasurer upon the warrant of the comptroller. Section 6. No provision is made by the act for the payment of any lien upon the lands, except that when a judgment for damages is rendered, and it appears that there is a lien on incumbrance upon the property appropriated, the amount thereof shall be stated in the judgment, and the comptroller may deposit the amount awarded in the proper bank, to be paid and distributed to the persons entitled to the same, as directed by the judgment. Section 19. The sum of $600,000 was appropriated for the purposes specified in the act, and the comptroller was authorized to borrow $400,000 more upon the request of the forest preserve board, to be expended under its direction.

On the 6th of August, 1897, after certain negotiations with the owners of a part of an extensive tract of land known as the ‘Totten and Crossfield Purchase,’ the forest preserve board passed a resolution accepting the offer of the owners of about 18,000 acres of township 23, and 32,000 acres of township 15, of that purchase, for the sum of $149,000, of which $99,000 was for the land and $50,000 was for certain improvements at Indian Lake for the use of the state, to be made in accordance with the plans and specifications to be furnished by the state engineer. Township 15 of the Totten and Crossfield purchase lies, as is admitted in the answer, ‘wholly within the bounds of the forest preserve, and also of the Adirondack Park.’ Upon the 15th of August, 1897, a representative of the state engineer with a surveying party began surveying at Indian Lake for the purpose of constructing a dam at its mouth, in order to stow water for the use of the Champlain Canal and for water power on the Hudson river. Upon the completion of the survey, plans and specifications were prepared, and the construction of the dam was commenced. September 18, 1897, the defendant caused a map and profile to be filed in the counties of Hamilton, Warren, and Essex for the extension of its road across township 15, which the forest preserve board had agreed to purchase as aforesaid, and which lies partly in each of said three counties. It also gave notice of such filing to the occupants, as required by statute, but did nothing else. About the 1st of October following, as the owners were about to convey to the state the lands covered by the resolution of August 6th, and receive their money, they were restrained from so doing by an injunction issued in an action brought by the Adirondack Railway Company against them. Thereupon they placed the deed in escrow, to be delivered when the injunction was dissolved, made another deed embracing the same premises, except the land described in the railroad survey, delivered it to the forest preserve board, and received the $99,000, according to agreement. Immediate steps were taken to vacate the injunction, but they were not at first...