The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1872-03-01

tApchSiOh vi fuurtn Jesse Coleman
street In the town of and George
The Act Of Assembly weSyer' unSer which
these proceedings were had expressly
authorizes the Court upon hearing to
modify, approve and confirm the rcport
of the viewers. In this respect the
General Borough Law of 1851 Is unlike
the Act of 9th of April, 1850, in regard
to the extension of Hancock Street i'm
the city of Pittsburg. BY the latter Act
no power to modify or revise the report
was reserved to the Court. Judge Nc.
Clure in constituting the law very prop.
erly held,6 Harris 80, that the Court has
no business with the question of assess.
ment upon lots. The legislatures con.
fiued that duty to the viewers; all the
Court had to do was to see that the spirit
of.the law was carried out.
The power of the Court under the
borough law, Pur. Dig. 100, Act of 1856
is similar to that given by the Act of13
April, 1884 In regard to erecting new
townships or altering the lines of a
township, wherein it Is provided that
the Court at the next term after the re.
port OF viewers shall be made, shall
take such order thereupon as to them
shall appear just and reasonable.
In constituting this law it was held In
Warwick township, 6 Harris 372, that
the Court may set aside the report of
the Commissioners, and appoint a new
commission, ,orithey may remit it to the
same Commissioners for further inyes-
tigation, or they may proceed to erect
the new township, or alter the lines of
the old one If they think proper, on
evidence TO be directly produced TO them.
Power to modify "a report and power
to take such action as to the Court may
seem proper are precisely the same.
Both provisions are intended to give
TO the Court, with the report and evil
dence before it, full control over the
whole subject, as well in regard to dam
ages as other matters.
The Court will not, however, except
in very clear cases, disturb the report
| of viewers upon question of damages
or contributions. When men of iudo.
ment, acting under oath and upop
knowledge acquired by an actual view
and full consider alton, have decided
such question, it must be considered
as equitable and just, unless clearly
| shown to be otherwise.
| In the case of jesse Coleman of whose
land the extension of Fourth Street
takes y feet inches from his front and
extending the whole depth of his lot
ana requiring the moving of his house,
nlne witnesses were examined who es-
ulhate MS damages to be greater than
III 1ne amount awarded by the viewers.
Two ol tnem estimate his damages two
hundred dollars-three ofthem-hundred
-one,two hundred and fifty-ope. three
to six hundred-one, five hundred, and
one, five to six hundred dollars more
than the report. In their estimate of
the value OF the property in its pres
ent condition some of these witnesses
differ fifteen hundred dollars from the
others. We mention these facts not as
any discredit TO any of the witnesses but
merely to show how much more diff.
| cultit Is for the Court to arrive at a cor
rect conclusion than for viewers upon
the spot with all the facts before them.
In ordinary road cases where there is
dissatisfaction in regard to amount OF
damages the only remedy is by a review,
no authority being given TO the Court
to modify. "a
Under the borough act there is no
provision for review; but as before
seen we may refer. the report back when,
If the complainant can satisfy the view
ers that injustice is done him, they would
without doubt cheerfully change their
| award.
If the viewers can be satisfied that
they have fallen into an error in regard
to the costs Of removing the house, dig
ging cellar and filling up in front-Or
| il by reason of not knowing the condi-
tion of the house they have erroneous
ly believed that 1t can all be moved
when it cannot, they will have the
power to 80 change the report as to cor
rect the error.
| AS the case now stands the Court
would not be justified in changing the
report ; the report being equal to the
oaths of seven men selected for their
impartiality and good Judgment, against
nine men of perhaps equally good
Judgment in addition to that of the
complainant. The testimony is there
fore so nearly equally balanced as to
forbid any attempt at modification. We
might perhaps do justice by dividing
the difference between the estimates,
but we think we would thereby set a
bad precedent We prefer therefore to
recommit the report to the same view
ers with instructions to reinvestigate
the question of the damages of Jesse
Coleman and, if they see cause, to in.
crease the same as they shall think just
or to report the same unchanged.
In regard to the except ons of George
Weaver we think little need be said. In
addition to the report of the viewers,
than whom we could not select better
judges of the value Of property and the
probable effects of Improvements, the
testimony produced by the complain
ant proves that the market value of his
land would be much enhanced by the
opening of this street.
According to Mr.. Appleman's esti
mate the whole land is now worth
$4,000. 1t can be cut up into four lots or
the north and four lots on the south
side of tho proposed street, the lots Oh
J the north would be worth four to five
hundred dollars, say $500, those on the
south side from three to four hundred
dollars each, say S1400. When the street
; is opened, therefore, this land will be
worth a. this estimate, 5000. Mr.
Sterner says that as lots for sale it will
be worth $1,000 more when the stree
is opened. Mr.. Shannon testifies tina
the lots will be more valuable after tn,
: street Is opened, but does not say how
t. much. Mr.. Correll think the valu
! would not be increased. This with tn
testimony of Mr.. Whary is all that i
adduced against the report. Mr.. Whar.
is not well enough acquainted with tn
property to give an opinion.
Whenever private property is takel
Z for public use and damages are claimed
! the rule of damage is how much less
the property of the complainant wort
in market with the Improvement, tha
it was without 1t. And when the hay
allows assessments for contributions
the question to be first settled is hoy
I much is the property worth more b,
reason of the improyement, When tha