The supply embraced within the franchise of the plaintiff did not, by the terms of the grant or by necessary implication, shut out all other means of obtaining supply there. And, in view of the demand of the rule of construction before referred to, such exclusive right in the grant of a public franchise cannot rest upon inference, presumption or doubtful construction. Chenango Bridge Co. v. Bing-hamton Bridge Co., 27 N. Y. 93; 3 Wall. 75. It would hardly be claimed that a grant to a ferry company of the franchise to supply the means of travel and transportation across the East river, between New York and Brooklyn, would confer the exclusive right on such company to control such transportation, by ferry, on that river between the two cities, although it would have the exclusive right to operate its boats and enter its slips. Such exclusive right would necessarily result from the nature of the grant as vested by it, because the property and means provided for the exercise of the franchise belong to the grantee, and can be occupied or used by no other party.