` STOCKTQN v. BALTIMORE & N. Y. R. 00. 9
Srocxron, Atty. Gen. of New Jersey, ·v. Bsurnaonn & N. Y. R. Co.
~ and others. . A
t , (Circuit Uaurt, D. New Jersey. August 1, 1887.; V
1. Cgnsrrrumonu. Law ·-» Pownn "·r0 Rmaunyrm Comm·nc1::" — Inrnnsrna
RIDGE. , ; - a' ._
The act of congress of June 16, 1886, authorizing the Staten_Island Rlwpid
Transit Company, a corporation of New York, and the Baltimore & ew
York Railroad Company, a corporation of New Jersev, or either of them, to
construct and maintain a railroad bridge across the Staten Island sound,
known as "Arthur Kill," and establishing “the same as a post·road,’f IIS
within the ppwer " to regulate commerce" vested in congress by the c0nst1tu-
tion of the nited States, it fbeing competent for congress, pn er that grant
of power, to open up commercial communication between different states, by
Q, land as well as by water} _ _ ’ _
2. SAMn—CoNsnN·r on run Srxrms. _ ’ ‘ `_  
The power of congress in this respect being supreme; and the act ln_pla1n
· terms granting authority to build zthe bridge, the privilege is,-not promissory
in its character, and may be exercised without the consent or concurrence of
the states in which the structure is author1zed by the actto be placed; -
8. SAME-Gnanr Consrnunn. ‘ _ · ` · "
r The grant by congress, inthe exerciseof its power to regulate commerce.
of the privilege of erecting and maintaining a bridge acrossnavigablewater
, from one State to another, is, in effect, a grant of the mere use of the soil
needed for the structure, and not an assumption of exclusivejurisdiction over
, such territory. Cession of thersoil by the state in which the land lies is,
therefore, not necessary to the exercise of the privilege.' I
4. SAMn—Con1=onsmons—Grrrznns· or Anornnn S·rs.·ra—Foua·rnnN·rn Annan
· Mawr. ‘ · · ·
The New Jersey act of April 6, 1886, prohibiting any person or corporation
from erecting any bridge, etc., over or in any part of the navigable waters
wherethe tide ebbs and Hows, and separating that state from other states,
without permission fromthe legislature of that state, is unconstitutional so
far as it is sought to be put 1nto operation against the‘Staten Island Rapid
Transit Company, a corporation of ew York, claiming to exercise the privi-
lege conferred upon it by the act of congress of June 16, 1886, of erecting and
_ ~ maintaining a railroad across Staten Island sound, or " Arthur Kill. "
5. Emnnrrr DOMAIN—LITTORAL‘ RIGHTB—STATE AND Fnnnnn. Jumsnrcwron.
The shore and lands under water of the navigable streams and waters of .
New Jersey, which, prior to the Revolution, belonged to the king of Great
Britain as part of the juror regalrla. of the crown, passed to the state at the
`close of that war, but the state succeeded to them as trustee of the people at
large; and, the right of the state therein not being such property as is suscep-
tibe of pecuniary compensation, it is not “private property, " within the -
meaning of Const. U. S. amend. 5, providing that private property. shall not
be taken for public use without just compensation.
On Bill for Injunction. .- A
John P. Stockton, Atty. Gen., Barker Gummere, and Oorllaradt Parker,
for informant. _1
A. Q. Keasbey and W. W. Maqfarland, for defendants.
BnApnnY,VJustice. This case was commenced by information iiled by
the attorney general of New Jersey, in the court of chancery of that
*As to what is included under the term "commerce, " within the meaning of the
clause of the constitution granting the ower to congress "t0' regulate commu·ce," see
Head-Money Cases. 18 Fed. Rep. 135, and)note; Memphis & L. R. R. Co. v. Nolan, 14 Fed.
ltop. 534; Norfolk & W. R. Co. v. Com., 6 Atl. Rep, 45.