The daily press. (Cincinnati [Ohio) 1859-1859, 1859-07-01
Street Railroads.

The City Council meet again to night to con-
slider the Railroad ordinance. We hopesto be
able to record its passage in our next issue,
and in such shape as will relieve the Probate
Court of any further interference in the matter.
We think the Council and our people generally
have treated the proceedings in this Court
little too lightly-and perhaps only have saved
the proper contract of our streets, by the Jury
disregarding the instructions of the Court on
the law or rule of applying damages-a rather
dangerous and unsafe practice. 1t would be
well for the Council to bear in mind, that two
of our most eminent lawyers are at the bottom
of this proceeding-have advised it-and, in
their opinion, their clients have only been de-
feated by the Jury taking the bit in their mouth.
Before another Jury, perhaps more obedent to
the Court, shall pass upon this matter, it
would be well that the whole subject be dis
posed of, and in such way, as the people may
have the rail car to ride en-, and the Council
retain all proper control ever tho streets. As
said before, the Council have power in this mat
ter, or they have not. If they have, the power
is conferred by law, and they should follow its
directions as strictly as if it was a proceeding
to appropriate private property-to assess a
specific tax for bowldering, or for any other
purpose. Ita soripta est, should be not only the
rule, but it is the law Of the case. The ordi-
nances Of other cities having the system in
successful operation, may generally DO taken
as safe precedents, but not absolutely, for some
municipalities may have greater powers than
others. Baltimore seems to have departed
from the line of safe precedents, and if she has
departed from the law also, she will reap the
bitter fruits. Her present difficulties, at the
very start, should warn our authorities of a
like course. 1t is said that she originated the
taxed and made sources of revenue, and in her
ordinance actually imposed tho per capita
tax on passengers carried in the cars,
the most odious feature of taxation the world
over, and in the Constitution of Ohio, abso-
lutely prohibited. 1t is said she has found
parties willing to pay this tax, but they 'oOn't do
il, and the city can't enforce it, and she will be
put at defiance, for going beyond the law.
There is no doubt about this, and such being the
intention of the parties. The actual average
cost of carrying passengers on the Boston and
New York roads is fraction over four cents
each. There is no reason to suppose they can
be carried cheaper in Baltimore, and there is no
reason to suppose that the Baltimore Company
will pay their whole net revenue into the city
Treasury, for the privilege of carrying the peo-
pie at the cost and loss Of the whole invest
ment. This is suppOsing little too much.
When Baltimore gets through, she may be an
example, but probably over tho left.
Our advice is to follow no such experiment
If precedents are to be taken, let us take the
safer precedents of more conservative citiesj
but even these VIC should bring to the test OF
the authority and. the law. No doubtful
powers should be exercised. If the councils
keep within the puryiow of their powers and
authority, and act promptly, "othello's Occu'
patton will be gone;" the Probate Court viii
again return to its legitimate business Of set
ling decedents' estates.
The Council has the matter in their owI
hands, and if they net promptly, they can SCI
at defiance all interference of the Court
whether it be legitimate or an usurpation. LIE
1t be done; make as good bargain for the city
US possible, taking care that all provisions arr