erty here contended for, but on the authority of the Rapid Transit Board to expressly contract for the use of the ducts in question. And in Brooklyn. Heights Railroad Co. v. City of Brooklyn, 152 N. Y. 244, the right of the corporation to build tracks in streets not named in the certificate of incorporation was sustained because necessary for the public convenience, reasonably essential to a proper discharge of its duties to the public, and fairly implied as a means of the amplest exercise of the powers specifically given which was consistent with the object and purpose of the public grant. Here the many ducts, now unoccupied, were constructed as part of the first or original structure to anticipate the public needs occasioned by the probable extensions of the subway system, and because of the difficulty, if not impossibility, of constructing them or adding to them after the subway wall was constructed. Indeed, apart from the requirements of future extensions, they may become necessary for the transmission of a motor power superior to electricity which may be disclosed by the future development of the railway art. The use of these ducts for the sale and transmission of electric current for motor power to third parties, whether the owners and operators of connecting or intersecting railroads or not, is a use of the public property contrary to the plain purpose of the Rapid Transit Act, not reasonably contemplated by the parties to the instrument of contract and lease executed thereunder, in no sense a railway use within the rules above stated, and, in so far as the company seeks to charge the cost of the generation and transmission of such electric current against the sum upon which its indebtedness to the municipality shall be computed, manifestly unjust to the city. Judg ment should, therefore, be rendered in favor of the plaintiff for the relief demanded in the complaint, with costs.

APPENDIX 0.

ORDERS OF THE COMMISSION.

APPENDIX O.

ORDERS OF THE COMMISSION.

Resolutions, general in their application and requiring the furnishing of certain statistical, property and franchise information by the corporations, have been formally adopted and filed as orders. There have been fourteen (14) of these resolutions adopted, as follows: Orders Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, Sa, 22, 27, 28, 53, 54, 136, 137.

Under the provisions of the Public Service Commissions Act and under the rules adopted by the Commission, any person or corporation, aggrieved by any act or thing done or omitted by any corporation under the jurisdiction of the Commission, may complain to the Commission of such act, or omission, such complaint to be in writing.

A copy of the complaint is then forwarded to the corporation complained of accompanied by an order directed to such corporation requiring that the matters complained of be satisfied, or that the charges be answered in writing within a time to be specified in the order. The time specified is usually ten (10) days, and the orders are known as 10-day orders or complaint orders. NOTE I. There have been 84 of these 10-day orders issued, all being except for names and dates substantially in the following form:

This matter coming on upon the complaint of

by which it appears that said complainant is aggrieved by acts done or omitted to be done by said defendant, and set forth in said complaint, which are claimed to be in violation of some provision of law or of the terms and conditions of defendant's franchise or of an order of this Commission, Now, upon said complaint, it is

Ordered, That a copy of the said complaint be forwarded to said defendant and that the matters therein complained of be satisfied or the charges in said

complaint set forth be answered by said defendant within ten (10) days after service upon it of this order, exclusive of the day of service.

be and the same hereby is approved and confirmed by the Public Service Commission for the First District, and ordered filed in its office.

I, TRAVIS H. WHITNEY, Secretary of the Public Service Commission for the First District, do hereby certify, that I have compared each of the above with the original orders of the said Commission and of the Commissioner, and that they are correct transcripts therefrom and of the whole of the originals. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my hand and affixed the seal of the Commission this .... day of 19...

Secretary.

These 10-day orders are filed under the following designations: Orders Nos. 5, 7, 23, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42, 47, 49, 51, 55, 56, 58, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 99, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 102, 103, 105, 106, 109, 110, 113, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 154, 155, 163, 169.

If the complaint be satisfied and the Commission notified of the fact, no further proceedings are taken.

If, however, the charges be not satisfied, and it appears to the Commission that there are reasonable grounds for the complaint, or if the corporation complained of demands a hearing, an order for a hearing is issued of which both the complainants and the corporation receive proper notice, or the Commission may on its own motion issue an order for a hearing.

There have been 46 such orders for hearings issued, including Order No. 166, which was for a rehearing.

FORM NOTE II. Those issued on the motion of the Commission frequently specify in numbered or lettered items the specific matters to be inquired into. FORM NOTE III.-The orders for hearings issued on complaint and answer are substantially in the following form: