The Newtown bee., 1889-03-08
Southport's Grade Crossings.

One of the counsel in the grade cross
ing case of Fairfield against the New
York, New Haven & Hartford railroad
was seen by Courant reporter and gave
a statement of the case and full ex-
PLANTATION of what the recent decision of
the supreme court means in general APP
plication. The decision arose upon GER
tain applications, some made by the rail-
road company and some by the town, for
the protection of 10 or more grade cross
ings in Fairfield. These application were
all heard by the railroad commissioners
together and disposed of in one order.
The town, feeling aggrieved by the man
ner in which the changes were ordered
to be made and by the assessment of
some $4,000 imposed upon the town
toward the expense of making them, APP
pealed to the Superior court. The case
was tried in that court before Judge Tor
rance, who changed the order of the COM
missioners in many particulars and es-
pecially in that he ordered the railroad
company to pay all the expense of the
changes as finally directed by him.
One of the highways in question cross
es the track short distance west of the
Southport depot. Immediately opposite
this depot another highway comes down
to the north side of the track and, skirt
| ing it for a few rods, DIVORCES toward the
north again. Where this highway adj
joins the track, "a crossing exists by which
access is obtained to the depot grounds
on the south side and thence to the vii
lage. This crossing was claimed by the
company to be trespass crossing, exist
ing by its sufferance, that passengers
might reach the depot from the northern
highway.
| Judge Torrance, following the order
of the railroad commissioners with re.
spect to the highways mentioned, direct
ed the crossing west of the depot to be
closed and the sstrespass crossing" to be
closed also and the highway which cross
ed next to the depot and the highway
which came down to the track opposite
the depot to be brought together north
of the track and carried under at a point
between the two original crossings, from
which point access could be still readily
had to the station.
From this order, the town appealed to
the Supreme court, claiming that the or
der as made virtually obliged the town
to give up an old highway crossing and
take longer road in order that the rail
road company might be saved the ex-
pense of making two crossings, one OF
which it was obliged by law to make en-.
tirely at it's own expense as an approach
to its depot from neighboring highway,
In other words, the order required the
town to contribute of its convenience
toward Tightening the sole burden of the
company.
| The railroad company also appealed
from so much of the order as required it
to pay the whole expense of changing all
the crossings, claiming that the statute
contemplated a sharing of the burden by
the town to some extent and that the
towns had been held to be in part re-
sponsible for the grade crossing nuisance
The Supreme court has. decided both
appeals in favorof the town. This de.
cision is believed to mean chat a highway
crossing which can be made safe where
it is may not be closed and Shifted to a
neighboring point simply to save the rail
road company expense; where the dan
ger at the crossing is caused by increas
ed frequency and speed of trains and ii
I about to be still further augmented By
additional tracks in the near future, !
judge is clearly right in holding that the
company should remove the danger at it
own unaided expense Courant.