The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-06-18
SMOKE Law is VALID
JUDGE HINE SUsTAINs THE CITY
ORDINANCE AGAINST FOUL
CHIMNEYS
SUPREME COURT WILL GET IT


mnn, Gives Notice of Appeal-The
Municipal Court Goes at Some
Length Into Matters of Law and
Fact.
In finding Jerry Ring, fireman Of the
Court block, guilty of violating the
smoke ordinance in decision filed yes
terday, Judge Hine upholds the city or
dinance, declaring 1t valid and in effect.
Immediately upon the announcement of
the decision Attorney George c. Squires,
counsel for the defendant, moved for
stay, In order that the case might be APP
pealed to the supreme court. The stay
was granted. July being fixed as the
date when the matter will again come
up.
. BY his decision Judge Hine overrules
all demurrers made in the several smoke
nuisance cases, declaring that, the de-
PENDANTS must stand trial. Judge Hine
renders lengthy decision, reciting the
history of the smoke nuisance in st. Paul
since the original attempts to regulate
1t. Up to the present time the efforts
have been futile Upon the last appeal
the supreme court held that the ordi-
nance then in effect could not hold, be-
cause the servant was not made liable.
The ordinance then was amended to meet
this defect and as amended is sustained
by Judge Hine. ~ ~, =. - - -
The objection most strongly urged
against the ordinance when the case in
point was argued was that it was I'M
reasona BILE. This Judge Hine holds. is not
true as he points out that the Speciflca-
do Inv he ar wit he
bounds prescribed by the legislature.
The objection that the law makes no dis
elimination between the business district
and the suburbs, where manufacturing
plants are located, is held not to be good.
Where due care Is taken to prevent
smoke from issuing from chimneys,
Judge Hine says, there Is no defense
against the maintaining of nuisance, but
points out that this may be urged In miti-
cation to lessen punishment.
In the Ring case the evidence showed
that a smoke consumer was in use IT
connection with the Court block engines,
but that upon the day the complaint was
made dense smoke issued from the china
ney for thirteen minutes. The complaint
was made by Patrolman Hervin. Judge
Hine says in part:
There seems to be some question as to
whether it is possible to prevent the es-
cape of smoke of a disagreeable chara.-
that by the use of smoke consumers and
care in applying the. coal that smoke of
/ the prohibited, character will not es-
| cape, even with the, use of bituminous
coal, and certainly not with the use of
anthracite, except perhaps when first
! starting the fires or Immediately after
cleaning, neither of which appear to have
been the occasion of the r cause of the
charge made against the defendant in
| this case. That at this particular place
the fires require cleaning twice a. day,
/ and smoke cannot be avoided when start
| Ing the fires again. that the coal used at
this station was Reynoldsville coal, which
ranks high in. fired carbon, and it is the
| most economical all things considered,
| including its Smoke-producing qualities,
that can be used and produce the results
| desired, and the best of the coal fur
| nished there by the defendants employer
is used up by the night crew; that the
plant in question supplies heat and
| effect of one stack instead of nine has
been to reduce the smoke to one-ninth
as much as if each building had a stack
of its own; that the density of the smoke
! depends uponzthe care with which the fir
ing is done, but that there are periods as
above mentioned when black smoke will.
chimney were built higher, it might les
| sen the smoke; but that it cannot be 50
built without new foundation. That
there is an objection to the smoke con-
sumner which is provided in this case arts
ing out of the cost cf its operation and
maintenance; that the higher the fixed
smoke; that the neighhorhood of the
stack in question is occupied by Office
buildings, living rooms and stores of va
rious kinds There is a sharp dispute as
| to the distance the smoke will carry,
which, however, does not appear to be
a very material fact in either view.
i must hold that the a1legatio of the
complaint are fairly sustained by the evil
dence, and. in fact, it appears to me that
! upon the defendants own showing such
| facts are in substance admitted AS upon
! the legal aSDoCtS of the matter II mn
| to me that the ordinance must be held to
| be valid. i am inclined TO think that sd
/. fendant is concerned; by far the larger
| parttof the defendant S testimony must be
| considered immaterial. 1t only becomes
material In determining the extent of the
punishment that the court, in viewing the
whole situation, and. in the exercise of
sound. discretion, should impose upon the
defendant. Upon that branch of the mat
| ter, 1t Is eminently proper, that thosesfacts
| should be taken into consideration
When our offices are subjected to fire.
/ quent recurrence of light and darkness
oceas1oned by the intermittent character
OF the smoke drawn from the chimneys
! and our books, Office furnishings and
goods of merchants exposed for sale are
covered by heavy black deposit from such
smoke, which it is impossible to remove
without injury. and our houses and vege-
tat1en are subjected to like annoyance
think, 1t may be urged, not without rea-
| son, that some legislative relief should be
granted to the citizen; and I think 1t NAV
fairly be said that it has been in response
| to such demand that the various proceed
ings have been taken by the council and
the legislature outlined above. And when
a valid ordinance is presented for consid-
Grafton under such circumSt anceS 1t is
the duty Of the court to look to its en-
forcement, and not lightly to set it aside,
| unless upon strong showing. Such
| showing L do not think the defendant has
presented. Therefore, both upon the facts
and law of the case. think the defend
ant must be held guilty of the commission
4 hn off naf1r Il
of the ordinance. But In view of the miti-
| eating circumstances in the case, do not
feel justified in imposing anv fine higher
4 than the minimum fine provided for in the
ordinance.