The evening times., 1896-11-30

The injunction suit of the United States
Electric Lighting Company against the
District Commissioners and the Potomac
Electric Power Company, by which the
complainant sought Ia enIoin the Com
mssioners from contracting with the lat
ter company for street electric lighting in
this city, was decided today by Judge Cole
The court held that the triumvirate had
full power to make the contract with the
Potomac company, and Il a Congress had
never created any exclusive right in the
United states Company, ,asthelattc cr claimed.
Attorney James X Redington, at the
conclusion of the reading ol The opinion
gave notice To the court that special ap-
peal to the court of appeals would he
made, So that the higher court might take
tie matter up at once and decide IL at an
early date.
IMPORT OF THE DECISION.
The decision was in writing, and Judge
Cole read from the manuscript. He re-
viewed the bill for Injunction. and said that
II appeared that in August last the Com
missicners were about to contract with the
Defendant company for an electric arc light
ing for one year of certain streets, and also
that a contract had already been made by
Supt Wilson for the lighting of various
city parks.
'Hl tbli-
tend for an injunction against lighting
west of Rock Greek, but IL claimed that the
defendant company had no authority for
work east OF Rock Greek. Judge Cole
held, however, that the grant IT, permit
the Potomac Company TO hight streets west
Of Rock Creek in Georgetown would not
prevent it from securing IA contract east
of the line defined. III such permit for
work IN Georgetown were prohibitory
measure. both companies might he deharrcd
from lighting east of Rock Creek, because
the United States Company also had a
permit to do work i'll Georgetown.
The court rcmar kcd uponth complainant
company's argument that Congress had re
fused to pass bill allowing the Potomac
Company to enter the city.
TIE decision held that Congress had not
refused, but merely failed to act.
POWERS OF THE COMMISSIONERS.
Judge Cole said that the Commissioners
claimed the power to make the contract
mentioned by virtue OF a provision in the
District appropriation act passed June l,
] -!,6 ana a provision in the sundry civil
hill of the same day.
'It is to nc remembered" said the court,
THAT the controversy in this case and the
argument was narrowed to the additional
lighting or necessary extensions of such
service mentioned in tue District ap-
preparation bill and the public parks re-
fcrrcd to in the sundry Civii bill.
1T has been cuntended on behalf of the
complainant that the Commissioners have
H. inherent powers as executive officers of
the municipal corporation to permit wires
for electric lighting purposes to be laid
under the surface of the streets of the city
Judge Cole here referred to the de
cison of Chief Justice Bingham that the
weight of authority was against any sGch
general power in the Commissioners, and
that they can grant such permits only In
pursuance of express or clearly Piled au-
thority from Congress.
JudgeC Cole saidthatit seemed unnecessary
to determine that question as both sides
seemed to accept Judge Iingham's drci-
sior as the correct view, but extracts from
10th the appropriation acts referred 10 con
fer authority by necessary implications
upon the Com nissoncrs 70 authorize the
laying of al wires under the surface OF the
streets necessary to do the lighting aU-
thorizcd.
The language of the law expressly aH-
thorizes the extension of electric lighting
to places not before lighted in that way.
1t is admitted thatthere are no such wires
intne streets and parks where the additional
lighting is to be done or in anv where il
could be done without laying additional
wires
This being so. that part of the law au-
thoriZing extensions of such service would
De a nullllN utlleSs Jne statute creates an
implied power in the Commissioners to per
nit the laying under the surface of some
streets the wires necessary to supply such
additional service
ANOTHER CLAIM DISPUTED.
Here the court mentioned that the claim
of the United States Company was that
while the Commissioners have the power
TO allow such wires to be put down a may
be necessary for the extension of the cleo
tric lighting service, that power is limited
to granting such permits to the complain
ant.
Judge Cole held that there was nothing
in the act of Congress indicating that the
extension of the electric lighting service
was to be along the line of the extension
of the complainant's underground system
In fact uo such claim had been made On
the contrary. it was contended that "neces-
sary extensions OF such service" meant in
the same streets that are now partly light
ed by electricity.
But If it be conceded that this is the