Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-09-12
GRADE CROSSINGS
B. & O. R. r. Go. Must Protect Them
Day and Night.
NO RIGHT RESERVED BY CONGRESS
Act Of the Legislative Assembly
Fully Applies.
MR.. THOMAS Salts FLED

| Referring 10 the statements of District
Attorney Birney and of MI. S. T. Thomas,
| the attorney for the District, reported in
yesterdays Star, to the effect that the act
| of the legislative assembly of August %,
| 1871. seemed to empower the District Com
missioners to compel the Baltimore and
| Ohio Railroad Company to maintain flag
nan or lanternman at all of its crossings,
| day and night. Mr.. John Kidout stated to
| a Star reporter today that it seemed clear
| that unless Congress expressly reserved to
itself power to make such regulations the
act of the legislative assembly applied. 1t
was his impression that under another sec
ton of the same act of the Legislative as
sembly the District authorities had proceed
| ed, successfully SO, against railroads run
ming their locomotives and trains through
| the city limits at greater speed than Sin
miles an hour. Therefore, remarked Mr..
Ridout. it appeared that the act has been
held to be valid and in force by the courts.
Case in Point.
| Mr.. Ridout referred to the of Col
way agt. B. and p. Railroad Company, de-
cided last May in the Court Of Appeals.
That was a case in which damages were
asked because of loss of life through the
alleged negligence of the company at one
of Its crossings. The act of June &C. 1873,
of the legislative assembly was referred to
in the case, and in speaking of that act,
which made 1t unlawful for railroad trains
to ring bells or sound whistles in the city
limits, the court said: This seems to be
such a municipal regulation as was clearly
within the power of that body Legislative
assembly, to enact (Stoutenburgh agt.
Hemrick, 100 U. S.. 14D and it may be con-
| ceded that the court was bound to take
notice of it if still in force"
| Authority of the Legislative Assembly
| The case of Stoutenburgh against Hem
| rich, referred to by the Court of Appeals,
was a case in which the United States Su-
| preme Court held that under the powers
conferred upon it by the Constitution, Con-
gress had ample authority to delegate to
| the legislative assembly power to enact mu-
nicipal regulations. From all that, thought
| Mr. Ridout, the District Commissioners
| have the power referred to in the act of
| August %, 1871, unless Congress expressly
reserved to itself such power. He explained
| that lie was not familiar with the charter
| of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Com
pany, and could not, therefore say whether
| Congress did or did not reserve therein
such power to itself.
Mr.. Thomas Satisfied.
Other lawyers conceded with Mr.. Ridout
that the act of the legislative assembly
seems to apply, and this afternoon all
| doubt in the matter was removed. when. in
a conversation with a Star reporter, Mr..
| S. 7. Thomas. the attorney for the District,
| stated that after carefully examining the
charter granted to the Baltimore and Ohio
Railroad Company by Congress, he had
reached the conclusion that the company
| could, under the act referred to, be sue
cessfully prosecuted in the Police Court for
failing to maintain f1agman in the day
time and lanternman in the night time at
its crossings
Mr.. Thomas explained that he had found
that in its charter of the Baltimore and
Ohio road Congress had not reserved to
itself the right to make such regulation
as was contained in the act of the icgisla-
tive assembly, and he had, therefore, no
doubt. whatever of the power of the Dis
trct authorities to successfully prosecute
the company whenever it failed to meet
the requirements of the act in question.
Will Tell the COmmi ssioners.
so have determined" said Mr. Thomas,
"to explain the matter to the District Com
missioners. when I will inform them that,
in my opinion, the Baltimore and Ohio
Railroad Company can be successfully
prosecuted in the Police Court for failure to
| observe the law contained in the act Of
the legislative assembly of August %,
1871
MIR. Thomas Opinion.
This afternoon Attorney Thomas re-
called his opinion, based on the reso-
| luton OF the Northeast Washington
Citizens Association, for further con-
sheraton, and has decided that while
| the Commissioners have not the pow
err to make any order or regulation as
requested by the citizens association, in
| compliance with the act of the legislative
assembly, referred to in The Star. they may
| be enforced by prosecutions in the Police
Court. He has examined the acts of Con-
| gress permitting the Baltimore and Ohio
| Railroad Company to come into this Dis
| trict, and finds no reservation of the right
| by Congress to regulate grade crossings.
| He is of opinion that the act of the District
assembly of 1871 was such municipal reg
ulation as that body had right to make,
| and hence that any railroad company vio-
| lating it's provisions could be prosecuted.
! The report of Lieut.. Kelley on the subject
| of f1agmen and headlights on trains and
| engines of this company has been referred
| to the Police Court for action, as requested
| by the Commissioners.