People Ex Rel. Municipal Gas Co. v. Rice

33 N.E. 846, 138 N.Y. 151, 51 N.Y. St. Rep. 853, 93 Sickels 151, 1893 N.Y. LEXIS 823
New York Court of Appeals·Decided April 18, 1893·Published·Cited by 25 cases

Opinion

O’Brien, J.

The relator took proceedings to enlarge and extend its corporate powers and business so as to enable it to manufacture and use electricity for producing light, heat and power. It is conceded that the proceedings were regular if power exists for the accomplishment of that object in the manner attempted. An amended certificate embodying the powers and objects sought to be attained was presented to the secretary of state who declined to file the same. The application was then made for a peremptory writ of mandamus requiring the secretary to file the certificate, from the order denying which this appeal was taken. The relator was incorporated as a gas company under chapter 37 of the Laws of 1848, and its business originally was confined to the manufacture of gas. The corporation was subsequently authorized by chapter 512 of the Laws of 1879, and chapter 73 of the Laws, of 1882, to use electricity for illuminating purposes, and by the same statute, a corporation formed for the purpose of producing electricity for light, heat and power, was authorized to use it for lighting streets, parks, dwellings, etc., and to make, use, *155 lease or sell apparatus for generating, and to lay and use suitable conductors for the same. So that since the enactment of these statutes a gas company has power to use electricity for illuminating purposes.

Chapter 688 of the Laws of 1892 (§ 32) authorizes any stock corporation, theretofore or thereafter organized under .any general or special law, to amend its certificate and extend or alter its business and powers in two cases : (1) The purpose and powers of such corporation may be so enlarged or extended, as to include any purpose and powers which, at the time of such extension, had been conferred by law upon corporations engaged in a business of the same general character. (2) They can also be enlarged or extended to embrace any purposes or powers which might properly be included in the certificate for the formation of a corporation of the same general character under any general law. When the amended certificate was presented to the secretary of state section 60 of art. 6, chapter 566, of the Laws of 1890 was in force, which, provides for the formation of corporations for manufacturing and supplying gas, and also for the manufacture and use of electricity for producing light, heat or power. If under that section either or both the objects may properly be included in the certificate for the formation of the corporations therein mentioned, then there was a general law authorizing the creation of corporations possessing all the powers that the relator sought to acquire, and the certificate should have been filed. The material parts of the section of the statute last referred to read as follows:

Three or more persons may become a corporation for manufacturing and supplying gas for lighting the streets and public and private buildings of any city, village or town, etc., or for manufacturing electricity for producing light, heat or power; and in lighting the streets, avenues, public parks and places and public and private buildings of cities,” etc.

The learned attorney-general insists that the objects and purposes of the corporations to be formed under this section are so separated by the disjunctive “ or,” that the certificate cam *156 not combine all the powers or purposes therein specified. That a gas company must still be organized as before, and so with a company for producing electricity for light, heat or power. They must still be organized for one purpose or the other, and both purposes cannot be combined in the same certificate, and this construction, he claims, is supported by the explanatory words of section 162, chapter 566 of the Laws of 1890, which reads as follows:

The provisions of this chapter, so far as they are substantially the same as those of laws existing on April 30, 1891, shall be construed as a continuation of such laws, modified or amended according to the language employed in this chapter, and not as new enactments; and references in laws not repealed to provisions of laws incorporated into this chapter and repealed shall be construed as applying to the provisions so incorporated, and nothing in this chapter shall be construed to amend or repeal any provisions of the Criminal or Penal Code.”

The chapter to which reference is here made was no doubt intended as a revision of pre-existing laws. But this section indicates that something more was also intended. The laws so revised were modified or amended according to the language employed. It is quite plain when all the provisions of the chapter relating to gas and electric companies are considered, that the legislature, in adopting the revision, intended to permit such corporations to amend the certificate in such a way as to authorize them to exercise powers and to enlarge the purposes and objects of the corporation beyond the limit within which they were restricted before.

The words “ and ” and “ or,” when used in a statute, are convertible as the sense may require. The substitution of the one for the other is frequently resorted to in the interpretation of statutes when the evident intention of the lawmakers requires it. (Sedgwick on Stat. & Con. Law [2d ed.], Pomeroy’s note, 371; Hardcastle’s Con., etc., of Stat. Law, appendix, 575, and cases cited; Wilberforce Statute Law, 130.)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

People Ex Rel. Municipal Gas Co. v. Rice, 33 N.E. 846, 138 N.Y. 151, 51 N.Y. St. Rep. 853, 93 Sickels 151, 1893 N.Y. LEXIS 823 (N.Y. 1893).

33 N.E. 846 (People Ex Rel. Municipal Gas Co. v. Rice) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Ashe
74 A.D.3d 503 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Town of Somerset v. Dighton Water District
200 N.E.2d 237 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1964)
Hurley v. Eidson
258 S.W.2d 607 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1953)
In re the Estate of Weil
280 A.D. 100 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1952)
People v. Malinauskas
202 Misc. 565 (New York Court of Special Session, 1952)
Richter v. City of Lincoln
285 N.W. 593 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1939)
Heckathorn v. Heckathorn
280 N.W. 79 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1938)
Alpren v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.
168 Misc. 381 (New York Supreme Court, 1938)
South East Public Service Corp. v. Commonwealth
181 S.E. 448 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1935)
In re the Estate of Kennedy
151 Misc. 292 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1934)
Outwater v. Public Service Corp. of N.J.
143 A. 729 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1928)
Knothe v. State
211 N.W. 619 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1926)
Ex Parte Anderson
242 P. 587 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1926)
In re Horace Keane Aeroplanes, Inc.
194 A.D. 873 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1920)
State Ex Rel. Stinger v. Kruger
217 S.W. 310 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1919)
People Ex Rel. Municipal Gas Co. v. Public Service Commission
120 N.E. 132 (New York Court of Appeals, 1918)
People v. Schwartz
183 A.D. 367 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1918)
Adams County v. Catholic Diocese
71 So. 17 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1916)
State ex rel. Rich v. Steiner
151 N.W. 256 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1915)