The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1891-04-17
AGAINST GRADE CROSSINGS.
A Chicago Case Similar to that Pend
ing in Savannah.


! The Electric Railway Company's litiga-
| ton with the Savannah, Florida and West
ern railway over the Gwinnett street cross
/ ing has excited considerable interest and
| good deal Of discussion concerning grade
/ crossings.
/ A similar case to that pending in Ssvan-
Z nah is pending in Chicago. and the decision OF
| the Illinois court in issuing an injunction
! against she street railway was in substance
! the sameas that rendered by Judge Falligant.
| When the Illinois Central Railroad Company
| fled bill in the circuit court to compel the
! city Of Chicago TO either cross its railroad
| tracks at an elevation or underneath in the
opening Of several streets, it was generally
thought that there was slight foundation
for the litigation, and the Chicago city law
department expressed the opinion that there
was nothing to the suit.
The positions taken by the respective par
ties are as follows: The Illinois Central
claims that the opening of the streets at
grade would endanger lives, stop the speed
of trains. prevent the company taking 250,-
900 people daily to the worlds fair at Jack
son park, interfere with the road carrying
nearly 1000, 900 passengers yearly over its
right Of way, and $3.50, 900 tons OF freight,
and that there would be a general injury to
the railroad business. IL was also con-
tended by the company that in condemna-
ton proceedings brought by the city to
open Fifty-sixth, Sixtieth and Seventy
ninth streets it was sought TO actually con
demn the railroad property instead of an
easement across the tracks, which could not
be done.
For the city it was argued that the COM
pany's remedy was in a court of law, where
IL had already filed motions to dismiss the
condemnation proceedings on the same
ground as set up in the bill The oitys
charter gave it the right to extend any
street over or across the right of way or
land Of any railroad, and the city council
could pass ordinances to that effect, as it
was the sole judge of the necessity of the
improvements. The right of eminent do
main was right inherent in the state and
one which the general assembly could not
bargain away by express grant or otherwise,
and the legislature could not exempt any
railroad company from having its property
or franchise taken when the public good re-
Quired it, The crossing could be used jointly
without serious injury to the railroad.
Judge Collins decided the matter in favor
OF the company. He held that the passing
Of the ordinances by the city council for the
opening of tine streets mentioned was arbi-
trary, and that the power had been used
regardless of the rights of the railroad
While the city had undoubtedly the right to
cross the tracks, the law gave to no person
or corporation the right to abuse arbitrary
power. The statements made in the bill
aud admitted by the demurrer showed on
its face that great hardship would be in-
ficted upon the railroad If the city was
allowed to cross at grade. If an
ordinance was unreasonable, a
court of equity could take jurisdiction
Whether the streets should be extended over
or under the tracks and the question of ex-
pense was matter Of future consideration
But the uncontradicted allegations in the
bill were sufficient to warrant tue granting
of an injunction until the case could DO
heard on its merits. The court said he would
give leave to the city to fSe an answer and
then it could move to dissolve the injunc-
ton. 1t decided, however, to stand on its
demurrer and appeal to the supreme court.
An injunction was then issued.