The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1883-10-25
MUNICIPAL POWER OVER
STREETS.

The Georgia supreme court has Just
rendered decision affecting the in
terests of incorporated towns and cit
les. 1t relates to the power of munlc-
ipal bodies over streets, lawns and
alleys. The decision was rendered In
case where Atlanta sued out an in
junction to restrain Il gas light COM
pany from digging up the streets OF
the city for the purpose of laying
pipes. The company won. A very
important part of the opinion reads:
Municipal corporations are created
by the general assembly and may be
destroyed by them. No rights are
vested in such corporations as against
the state. They can exercise no other
powers than those conferred by the
acts creating them; they are subordi-
nate agencies to assist in the admins
tration of the government of the state.
Over their streets, lanes and alleys, it
would seem that the state, through
its legislature, has as much power and
control as it has over other public
highways, which it may change, alter
or abolish at will. The court
holds, therefore, to the doctrine,
which is recognized in Texas as true,
that the state, through the legisla-
ture, has jurisdiction over the streets
of the towns within it's limits; that a
company which obtains charter from
the legislature, for any purpose which
requires the soil of the streets of any
town to be disturbed can proceed
with its work without getting the
consent of the town authorities. The
Georgia court, in its opinion on this
point, held that the legislature could
authorize gas company, chartered by
it in 1875, to use the streets of an in
corporated town or city for its pipes
and fixtures, and the permission of
the city was not required to enable
the company to exercise its fran
chises, and any ordinance inter-
fering with or denying the exercise
of right, thus granted by the legisla-
ture, has been held void. Another
point in the Georgia case is worthy of
notice. Assuming that a town has
exclusive jurisdiction over its streets,
if it permit company in the exer-
else of its rights to make a large out
lay without protest, it is estopped
from interposing objections, which
would cause loss to the company OF
the money already expended, pro-
vided the objections be such as could
have been interp sed in the begin.
ming. With regard to this point the
court declares: 1.-THE city of Atlanta
having stood by and seen the compa
ny make an outlay of $4,000 in the
exercise of its rights under this char
ter, without intimating to it that OBJ.
lection would be made to the use OF
the streets for the purposes author.
lied, without the use of which it's en-
terprises would not have been under
taken and could not be prosecuted
and would lose it's entire outlay and
be ruined, such city would
now be estopped from refusing
to allow the laying of the pipes
Questions of right of way along
streets claim attention just now il
many towns and cities of Texas. and
especially are they of interest in Aus
tin at this time. There is one ques.
ton, however, which has not been
at all considered in this city-the
right OF cities to require payment fol
the use of streets for special purposes
Street railways, in New Orleans, are
required to pay annuities for the use
of the streets, and so it should be in
every city where their construction is
permitted. Telephone and telegraph
companies should alone be required
to pay for the use of streets. The
poles occupy space, and their insight,
ly appearance makes streets anything
but attractive in appearance. If ever
a city council is secured for Austin
having within itself governmental
discretion, THE STATESMAN will ask
it to legislate upon these matters. To
ask it now would be absurd.