The record-union., 1893-10-19

eompanied by the name OF the writer, noI IoI
publication unless so desired, but as guarsn-
tee OF good faith.-EDS.
Some Questions Answered-The People
Make the Laws.
EDS, RECoRD-UNIoN: VIII you, with
your usual generous fairness, permit me,
through "Everybody's Column" to
criticise one of your editorials? If 1 use
language which may seem sharp, will
you kindly consider it parliamentary
license, for / assure you in sincerity that
have the highest regard and friendli-
ness for you and admiration for the
ability with which the RECORD UNION IS
conducted. You seem 10 me capable OF
making black appear white, or nearly so.
In your issue CT Saturday, October
18th, under the heading of Questions OF
Private Right and City Improvement"
you have given me good deal OF legal
information, but not enough TO satisfy
me.
l want more, for I claim to be a law
abiding citizen, and it is only necessary
TO make me understand the law to in
sure compliance with it on my part even
if I consider it arbitrary, for l think it
would show lack of wisdom for a weak
individual to buck against combined
force
From your article and assertions l see
that l have been very much mistaken IN
assuming that justice and law are syno-
nyms; still there are some things which
your article has not made plain TO me, so
if you will kindly explain a few more
points it may enlighten me and others.
Enactments by the people III legisla-
tive capacity assembled are laws, but not
always are they just.-R.-U.
After statement OF the case, to which
I do not object, you say: First, he
never had legal right to place post on
property he does not own"
Permit me to ask: Who does own it ?
have been under the impression that If
the street was abandoned l would own
the land to the middle OF the street IN
front of my premises.
[The street is the property of the body
of which our correspondent is factor,
known as a municipal corporation,
creature of the will of the people eX-
pressed through enactments known as
laws.-R.- u.
You say: He has no moral right to
plant post in the highway to sustain an
addition to his house extending over
property to which he has no title. He
put the posts there by sutferance, and
must be presumed to have known that he
had no legal or moral right to do so that
the people, through their representatives,
could at any time compel him 10 remove
the nuisance" According to this state
ment am a legal and moral trespasser,
and, of course, l am liable for damages,
but who to? Is it to the citizens OF the
city or the city authorities?
Not a treSpaSSer until the people, |
through their representative body, created !
by themselves-other the municipal
legislature-so declare by withdrawal of
the permission. The question as to
whom our correspondent is liable for
trespass is a bit of sarcasm on his part
and in the nature of a pleasantly
R.-U.
do not fear that any citizen will claim
the right TO prosecute me, and how the
citizens can delegate q power which they
do not possess. is a mystery TO me-
GThey have the right under the ConsUi- |
tuition to enact, so that for disobedIence |
thereto punishment may be meted out. |
-R.-U.1
Between citizens legal right would be |
acquired by sufferance, and also a statute /
of Limitation would intervene to prevent /
prosecution; but if the delegated au-
thorities are exempt from any OF these !
restrictions which the law imposes on |
citizens, then L must In conscience re- /
assert that we are subject to tyranny as
absolute as that of any autocratic power |
[Unquestionably a legislative body may
SO legislate as TO be unjust, even tyran-
nous-within constitutional limits, at
that.-R.-U,
You assert that ''it makes no difference
whether his awning is a good one or not.
the people through the representative
body have declared that the trespass on
their property shall not continue. The
people are supreme, and their will is law"
If this assertion Is true, the representa- |
tive body of the people are not subject to
any law. What two out of three assert is |
the will of the people, that is law.
Y es, if not limited by the Constitution |
of the United States and the State and |
the settled principles Of human right
R.-U.]
must admit that I didn't understand
it before. imagined that they were dele
gated to carry out the will of the people |
as expressed in the law, and that the legal |
rights OF the delegates were no greater !
than the legal rights of the people who |
delegated them.
You are correct in that view.-R.-U.] |
If your assertion is true, appeal to the |
people for justice. and 1 am not afraid of
the people. True, if a majority are COM
bined they can force me to destroy my
own property or do anything, but I have
not the least fear that they will L am one
of the people, and l believe the great ma
jority of them love justice, more even
than beautiful city.
The people cannot invade any right
guaranteed to the citizen by the Constitu-
tion and the settled principles of human
Iight.-R.-U.
You ask: tsBy what right does our
ferance under which he erected his posts
in the street?' l was claiming it under
moral right, with a full belief that it was
legal right, but you have knocked my
moral right out with the assertion that /
had no moral right, and you have
knocked my legal right endways with
few of your powerful words.
If fall back on the plea of ignorance,
and say l didn't know that the people
owned the street, and supposed that l had
a legal right to put up awnings and sup
port them on posts the same as others
did. particularly as they were considered
desirable at that time by nearly all of the |
people as q protection from sun and storm !
to passers over the sidewalks, as well as |
to business men who occupied the build /
ings-you head me off by the assertion /
that l must be presumed to know that l |
had no right.
the awnings; a right conceded, but endur- |
ing only by sutferance of the people; |
otherwise the law.-R.-U.
L don't see what can do, unless I come |
the insanity dodge; or perhaps a plea of /
imbecility might stick, for it does seem
plain that man must be fool to go to !
so much expense trying to benefit him.
self and the public both without particle |
of right anywhere.
II the people own the streets, including !
the sidewalks, what right have they to /
force me to construct sidewalk or pave I
a street for the use of the people, except I
the right of might?
The law you and other people made I
setting up that system.-R.-U.
You argue as though l was not one of /
the people, and as though l have no indi- /
vidual rights.
[0h, no!-R.-Ul
That is Just what I comnlaina1 Of tho |