Selden v. . the Del. Hud. Canal Co.

There can be no doubt that it was correctly decided by the supreme court, when this cause was before it on another case, that the defendants had the legal right to enlarge their canal as they have done. (24 Barb. 362; see, also, Bruce v. Same, 19 id. 371.) There is no pretense that the canal, as enlarged, is not suitable, in respect to width, depth and dimensions, to the business in which the defendants are engaged. By their charter, this company were authorized "to make, construct and forever maintain a canal, or slack-water navigation, of suitable width, depth and dimensions, to be…