Rock Island daily Argus., 1888-09-17
THE VIADUCT QUESTION.
Railroads are Liable for These Pro-
tections and Also Approaches and
for Damages

Railroads are Liable for These Pro-
teetions and Also Approaches and
for Damages
The following article from the Chicago
Tribune which has been made public by
Judge J. W, Green, formerly of Dsven-
Port. now corporation counsel of Chicago, |
will be found of interest since the viaduct
matter is now being discussed through |
the efforts OF monopOlistic influences to
oppose public improvements:
Judge Green, the corporation couns sel, |
has discovered an important decision of |
the Connecticut supreme court sustaining
his view as to the liability of railroad |
corporations to pay for the construction |
of vladuCts over their tracts, including |
approaches, and paying on account of |
damages caused by such construction to |
adjacent property. 1t is the case of
Caroline NJ Burrett vs. the city of New
Haven and the New Haven & Northamp
ton Railroad company. reported in the
42d Connecticut. The railroad had laid
tracks crossing a highway in the outer
part of New Haven in 1913 In 1859 the
city had so much extended. and travel
over the highway had so increased that
the city council ordered the railroad corr
poratiou to build viaduct over its
crossing. The railroad people refused to
build After negotiation the railroad
company built the superstructure of the
viaduct, the city building the approaches.
The plaintiff sued the city and the rails
road company for damages done her
property on abutting lots by the con-
struction OF approaches. The court held
that the railroad company alone was lia-
BILE for those damages under the broad
principles of the common law. The ne-
cessity of the viaduct grew out of the ex-
istence of the railroad The common
council had no right to enter into con-
tract with the railroad company where
by it agreed to build approaches
The duty of railroad compa-
ny TO restore highway to its
former usefulness was not discharged
when 1t restored il to 8 proper condition
at the time OF its construction, but was a
continuing one, and embraced such al
teratlons and improvements as should
afterwards be made necessary by the
growth OF the city and the increased
travel. The court further held that 1.-THE
embellishments (approaches) at the end of
hndge (viaducU, made necessary on
restoring highway to its former useful
ness, are part of the railroad structure,
and party incidentally injured in then
construction has as perfect remedy
against the company for consequential
damages as for direct injury by it iu the
original construction of the road" The
order OF the common council insreferenCt
to the structure extended only to the
abutments and the viaduct proper, bu
the court held in this language: "The
building of the bridge rvisduct prope
was necessary to give the public a SAFE
and convenient passage over the defen
dsnts tracks, and the filling in of the ap
proaches was required in con-
sequence of the erection of the
bridge viaduc, in order to re-
store the street TO its former usefulness
which it was the duty of the defendan
to do. The fact that the dut,
is by law imposed on the company il
sufficient to charge it with all the conse
quences of such an execution of it as re
suits in injury to others"
Nothing in the opinion of Judge Green
is so clear in Its application to those rail
roads which like the Northwestern roal
entered the CITY without entering int,
stipulated agreements to construct via
ducts. They will have to build them AM
pay the damages of construction in orde
TO restore the streets which they cross t
public usefulness. As to these roads il
which express stipulation is made for tn
construction of viaducts it is clear case
This refers to roads entering the cit
since 1873 when the express stipulation
were first incorporated in the law
During the municipal administration
OF ls72|73 Judge Tuley, who was the
corporation counsel, presented this deci
sion TO meeting of railroad men calle
oy the mayor They had been kickin
against the erection of yiaducts. Whe
Judge Iuley expounded the law to theI
they began to weaken. The provision @
tile ordinances of 1878 in relation to via
ducts was based on the principles of th
decision and was intended to give ther
effect All the roads are obliged to bull
the Viaducts, approaches, etc., and pa
the damages, however, without expires
stipulation.
Proceedings will be commenced at ono
against the Milwaukee & ST. Paul roa
10 compel 1t to pay the cost, includin
damages, OF the northern approach c
the Ashland avenue viaduct.