New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-11-13
RUNNING CARS ON sUNDAY-DECIsION OF THE
PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT
ne Inquirer. Nov. Ii.

The decision of the majority of the Judges
OF the Supreme Court OF Pennsylvania stripped Oh al
Sunday punishable in no other manner than by prose
cuton for the amount of the penalty pecned IN tne Ass
and employment the first day OF the week IL is de
clared that the company which runs us cars G9nnot
Justice; that they plaintiffs, nave mol cause Ior
complaint Of any tangible wrong, when Is 5 ae
than other citizens, IN consequence OF the mat
the noise Of the ears going along me streets tne
ance is mental. rather than actual caused by the ds
agreeable effect 1t has upon Their religious iee.g II Is
strant must be general and so as To Affect all persons In
this case the conflicting adayits OF persons VINO Ved In
the same neghbOrhoods OF whom ayered that the
running the annoyance, ana others VINO as
strongly declared that II was not, rendered decision
i'm the face OF such controversy dangerous, because IL
could be sustained by the weight OF the evidence
The court also noticed the fact that the running OF the
ears on week days was ayerred 10 be nuisance or
cause OF complaint showing that the annoy 10 tue
complanants was to their opinions and not physeay.
Under such circumstances the court declared that IL
could not sustain the resort to equity proceedings or De
cree an injunction The court also noticed the TACT that
Albany Troy, Brooklyn Hoboken, Jersey CITY, Baltl-
more Nashville Cincinnati and &C. Louis and said
ming City Of Philadelphia Is nuisance and injury 90 private PSp
tsy are not nanse a communities deyo
Oha careful Of their interests than ours We are 70 eoa them
all equal In intelligence aud morality must regard az further es
mon running passenger not nuisance or becomes one py
I'M This opinion which was delivered by Justice Thomp-
son ChietJustce Woodward and Justice Read eoncurred
The latter however, Went much iurther, anu ho ony
sustained the decision but argued that the running OF the
cars on sunday for the accommodation OF the popua;
ton OF largo city, who could hnd no other means OF
travel was work OF necessity and charity, specially
executed in the of 1894 and therefore not even pun
ishnble by Justice Strong, who granted the orgn
Injunction and Justice Agnew dissened from the OPINION
Of the majority. =, . .ou..orai
An important decision was also given in collateral era
case depending somewhat upon that OF sparhawk asr
the Union Passenger Railway Company After thc Tt
had commenced proceedings person OS hi sIeg
OF stock In the Company, and thercupon hleu % bis
Ing that AS "a stocllolder the Company was yeS hy
Interests by running IT'S cars sunday; III anew ,oS
the Company IL cOntended that TINS ~ ne other
made nv arran cement with the complan,hs t .I o
% tt ~ was done i'm order help them III inc TIC u.s.
and for no to try
~ tbc comnony might not have right when Sp hye
"a 49, 10 the corporation, nlIgn ot .
This bill dismissed Tae s cSS5i rS to ask an in
oona Hae % Company il violating law D1t lnat III
this case the whole tbe epsrt by one who
% b ock after the Sunday ears were m i6 na iS
Therefore could not be injured py a Una" eoncnrred in by all
,he I'm inSSes except Justice Strong