Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-03-30
WHAT THE LAW SAYS
In Regard to Various Obstructions of
the Sidewalks of a City.
CASES THAT HAVE BEEN DECIDED.
The Marine Bank Test Case to be Pushed
Forward to Decision.
A GREAT DEAL OF FEELING EXCITED

deal OF feeling yesterday, as large maiorit,
of the people are similar trespassers. Il
make the sidewalks entirely free would, al
admit, be good thing, and it would makt
large amount of work with which to in
augurate the spring season, but many peo
pie would scarce find any honey in the cane
were il applied previous to other argument
The fear is that the corporation proceeded
against may take it into its soulless head tc
make it patent that what is sauce for the
goose is an excellent condiment for tbs
gander; that it may sing:
Haste me to know it; that with wings a:
swift
As meditation, or the thoughts of love,
May sweep to my revenge.
All the streets except in the suburbs OF
the East End, are filled with Instructions
that are greater by far than the one COM
planned Of Some lawyers were spoken to
on the subject, yesterday.
VIEWS OF SOME LAWYERS.
Major Brown said he supposed that cellar
doors that lay fat on the pavements might
be tolerated, provided they were strong and
safe, and not kept open unnecessarily, but
area railings could not stand under strict
enforcement of the law.
William Hunter, Esq, seemed to think
that the sooner the law was uniformly en-
forced the better.
Thomas H. Davis, Esq, was inclined to
think that even cellar doors lying fat might
subject their owners to trouble, unless they
were corrugated, so that people would not
be liable to slip, and were made perfectly
safe in other respects. Mr.. Davis referred
the INQUIRER to the following rulings bv the
= al 80 n.ll1nfe RsATp ioip al
Corporations, where the following deliver
ances were found:
In Smith versus Simmons, error to the
Common Pleas of Susquehanna county, the
Supreme Court (Justice Gordon) said: ''No
one has the right to throw wood or stones in
the street at his pleasure; nevertheless, as
building is necessary, building materials
may be laid therein tor a reasonable time
and in a convenient manner. So NAV mer-
chant occupy the street with his goods, etc.
He says public highways may thus be occu
pied permanently in cases OF necessity.
In Dillon's Municipal Corporations" is
found much bearing on the subject, more or
less directly: "It is not a negligent or
wrongful act for a city to silently allow the
owner of property abutting on a street prop
erlv to construct coal vault under the side.
walk" Lafayette versus Blood, 40 jud. 62,
1872.
MUST BE CAREFUL.
The owner of vault under the sidewalk
must keep the scuttle safely covered. HE
is not discharged from liability by the fact
that, having provided sufficient covering,
it was, without his knowledge, fractured or
rendered unsafe by the wrongful acts of
others" Congreve VS. Morgan, IS, n. Y,
81, 18S.
Where a city permits cellar wav to be
constructed in the sidewalk of one of its
principal street, which cellar way is not
guarded in any manner except by trap
door, and it is dangerous for persons travel
ing on said sidewalk when said trap door
is not closed, and when the city permits the
person occupying the adjoining lot and
those acting under him to open or close said
door at their option, the city is liable ior
any injury that may occur by reason of any
person falling, without fault on his part,
into said cellar way, when said trap door is
left open" Smith VS. Leavenworth, Kan,
81. IS.
Whether it is negligence, for which CITY
is liable, for the CITY Council to allow eel
lars under its sidewalks, in front of shops,
is a question for the jury, in an action
against the city by one injured bv falling
into such cellar" Augusta VS.. Hofers, SO
Ca, ISL"
MUST OBEY THE LAW,
Judge Fetterman said there was no doubt
that all people might be made to conform to
the law unless thev could show that they
had been empowered by Councils to devi-
ate. He referred TO the case of the bank on
Sixth street, the Fifth National, which was
TO take down a bay window, on
of people that it obstructed the
view. He said that no person, except by
could occupy beyond the line of
the street, save when it became necessary SO
to do, in case OF building or making neces-
sary Improvements, and during the time
necessary to handle goods.
Chief Bigelow, of the Department of Pub
lie Works, said yesterday, with regard to
the test case instituted against the Marine
Bank, that it would certainly 20 on. He
was confident the principal was right, and.
it might work some inconvenience
10 business property holders in the old citv,
he increased crowding of the thoroughfares
would diminish its necessity. Under a
prior decision of Judge Stowe, he said, in
he case of man who infringed some two
eet upon the sidewalk on Smithfeld street
he storm door and case had to be removed,
ind there was no more authority for occupy
ng the public thorough fares BY guards for
cellar ways and stone flights of steps. The
decision of the Judge called for passenger
privileges from building line to building
inc, the space between which constituted
he street. OF course, Mr.. Bigelow said, he
lad commenced a test upon a building in
course o! construction, which had been al
'eady notified not to obstruct the thorough
are.
ALSO A TRASsGRESSoR.
james S. Mexican, the Postmaster, was |
Isked few questions on the subject. and |
although be hoped 10 move from his present |
quarters before any action would be taken |
lgainst the Government building, be was
compelled TO admit that the steps on the ex- |
erior of the postoffice interferred somewhat |
With, pedestrianism, and might be considered |
o rather infringe upon the city highway in |
he strict acceptance of the term. He laugh
nglv begged that he might not be quoted as
'pposing the movement, as in the new build
ng no infringement would be made on the
lights of the passers.
c. L. Magee. who returned Yesterday
morning from seeing his brother, W. a,
dsgee, off on a sea voyage 10 the Wind
yard Islands, said he though the idea was
good one. The congestion of travel
oward the center of the old city necess-
ates the utilization of every inch of space
DR. the sidewalks. "Yes, 1 suppose changes
yill have to be made in some of the old |
ity business houses, and as to getting in
-eight and other material, why the ground |
oor and elevator will relieve the pressure
n this respect"
John S. Lambie, Councilman for the
,ighth ward, also agreed with the legality
f the measure, and cited a decision by the
upreme Court of this State, on the con-
truction of bow window in Philadelphia
.hich was ordered taken down. But, Mr..
.ambie added, there does not probably exist
be same necessity for pedestrian space on
sidewalks as those of Pitts
urg.
The Finest Diamonds in the City.