Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1883-08-28
Aarlcaster f11telhgencer.
TUESDAY EVENING. AUG. AZ. 1883.

lancaster f1tlClIgEIUII.
TUESDAY EVENING. AUG. 23. 1883.
The Wooden Poles Must 60.
II will be seen. by the contract we print
elsewhere between the lamp committee
,f councils and the vice president of the |
Maxim electric light company, that the |
latter does not even have the authority
Of the city to erect its obnoxious poles
on the sidewalks. It is private cor
poratlon which has agreed with the lamp
committee of councils to provide 12O
electric lights in this city, at such points
as the committee may designate, for
certain sum of money. 1t does not
covenant for the privilege of erecting
poles and it follows that it does not have
the authority of the city to erect them.
The city solicitor gives it to the
mayor as his opinion that the
city, through its lamp committee,
having contracted for the electric light,
has by that act conferred upon the elec-
trio light company all the power which
the city possesses TO put up the applian-
ces which are necessary for the erec,
tion of the light. 1t is possible that the
courts may so decide though it is by
no means clear that the lamp committee
has thus implicitly clothed the Maxim
electric light company with the power
of the city. But even that opinion does
not claim that this contract has con
ferred upon the company any power to
do an Objectionable thing that is not
absolutely necessary to the lighting OF
the city with the electric lamps. What
the people of this city and the property
holders object to SO strenuously are the
large and unslghtly wooden poles strung
along the streets, six or eight to a block,
making our avenues resemble with their
many towering masts the docks of sea
port city. These poles are very unsightly
and disfguring to the city. The people
do not want them on the streets, and we
believe they would lather forego the
electric light than have them. The
property owner, on whose pavement
they are planted, does not want them.
and certainly would rather have the coal
oil illumination than electric light at
such sacrifice of his interests.
We do not suppose the city authorities
desire to impose upon the people what
they do not want. We cannot believe
that they desire to confer upon the
Maxim company any power the city may
possibly have, to cucumber the streets
with their wretched wooden masts. The
contract of the lamp committee does not
require it. The Maxim company is
obliged to furnish its 12O lights in way
that will be acceptable to the people.
They have only the power which any
other contractor has. They can put up
poles if they get the consent of the prop
erty holder, and OF the city authorities.
The citizens generally cannot probably
stop their work on the ground that their
poles are a nuisance, as the courts would
no doubt leave that question to the de-
clSlOn OF the city councils.
Whether the councils have the power
to compel the property owners to allow
the erection of wooden electric light
poles, is a question which will come up
for decision should the exercise of this
power be attempted. 1t is not now a
question, since the Maxim company is
left to paddle its own canoe under the
advice of the city solicitor to the mayor
to keep his hands off, the people are left
undisturbed in the exercise of their pri
vilege of cutting down the poles erected
on their sidewalks, just as they would
remove any other obstruction put there.
1t is in truth the place of the mayor to
prevent the erection of these poles until
the right of the company to put them up
is legally determined. That right is
disputed nearly universally, and it is the
duty of the mayor to forbid with the
police force the forcible deprivation of
every right reasonably claimed by the
citizen.
The Maxim company are proceeding
with their work in the mode made IA
miliar by the telegraph line men who
have reduced pole raising to science
They boldly assume right they know
they do not have, and if the property
owner objects to submitting to the pro
cedure, they play bluff game CT one
of cajolery or conciliation, just as the
temperament of the particular individual
they are dealing with seems to demand.
They generally carry their point and Put
in their pole. If they find their custo-
mer Obdurate they try his neighbcr and
so manage to slip along. This sorS of
tactics seems to be highly appreciated 10y
our lamp committee, which is lending
its efforts to grease the way of the Maxim
people through onr streets. Chairman
Diller advises objecting property holders
to talk smoothly to the electric light
company, and declares that they will dc
anything to be accommodating. Nc
doubt they can be readily persuaded te
go on a neighbours sidewalk, if the neigh
bors will let them stay. But that is a
very mean business. A man who objects
to pole on his sidewalk and seeks to
shove it off on that of his neighbor
needs praying for though we fear he is