The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1895-08-30
THAT TURNPIKE SUABBLE
City Has Had Esouah Of It, Says the
Judiciary Committee.
FAVOR ENDING LITIGATION
Notwithstanding Prayers OF Providence
Residents. Judiciary Committee VIII
Recommend That Matter Re Not
Taken to Supreme Court.

After mature deliberation the judi
ciary committee of select council voted
last night to recommend to council that
the mayor be instructed To accept as
final the decision of the court IN the
suit between the city and the Abing-
ton Turnpike company.
The threatened continuance of the
costly litigation was not generally Ia
vored by councilmen. but many OF the
residents OF Providence who were d.
rectly engaged in the local conflict
with the turnpike company were not
satisfied that the city should have to
lay over money to the toll gate COM
pany and prayed council to carry the
matter to the supreme court. A long
petition. headed with the name of
Councilman LOTUS. was also received
from residents of that locality asking,
that the verdict of the court be accept
ed. Major Fish and Mr.. Atherton, of
the turnpike company, presented this
petition and argued before the COM
mittee. Colonel Sanderson. chairman
of the Judiciary committe, after a de-
cision had been reached. announced
that the petition of the turnpike people
had not influenced him In the least
Ii was the sense OF the committee that
the decision of the lower court was
fair and just and would not be reversed
oy the supreme court. consequently
additional expensive litigation was not
to be courted.
Origin Of the Case.
The case of the Abingdon Turnpike
company against the city of Scranton
grew out of the city's neglect To fulfil
Its contract to keep in repair that por-
ton of the road within the city limits
which the company agreed to allow the
city To use without payment of toll on
that condition. The sQuabble began by
the turnpike people removing its toll
gate from outside the city limits to a
point near Cusick's hotel on West Mar
ket street in order To reimburse itself
for the repair of the road. To circum-
vent the company, oak street was
opened, but an accident and consequent
damages resultant decided the city to
practically abandon this thoroughfare
In the meantime the company had
placed it's toll gate just at the top of
the hill near the Winton homestead on
West Market street and the great in
convenience this occassioned brought
the city TO Il compromise. by which it
agreed TO keep the road in good repair
II the toll gate was removed outside the
city limits. This was done, but after
a while the city became neglectful, SO
the turnpike company thought. and at
its own expense made the repairs which
were deemed necessary and sued the
city to recover the amount expended.
Amount OF the Claim.
The company claimed an amount
somewhere in the neighborhood of
$4,000, but the jury allowed only half
that sum. The company was satisfied
with the verdict. but some of the Provi-
dence people Were not and urged the
councilmen to take the matter to the
supreme court.
The judiciary committees action last
night virtually ends the matter unless
enough influence can be brought to bear
on councils to refuse to adopt the COM
mittee's report.