The times., 1899-04-05
THE COURT OF APPEALS.
Important Decisions Handed Down
by the Tribunal.

| important Decisions Handed Down
| by the Tribunal.
The Court of Appeals yesterday reversed
the judgments of the Police Court sus-
tanning the police regulation requiring real
estate agents to remove snow from
the sidewalks in front of premises Of VII ch
they have charge and in protect ng the
Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore
Cab Company in its occupation o. certain
space near the Sixth Street depot st aside
for the exclusive use of its servants
The judgment of the lower coLTt in tie
case of John Price who was convicted of
grand larceny, was confirmed. The de-
fendant. Price il will be remembered was
convicted last November of robbing Arti ur
a. Babendrier OF 81, $50 in the Vatoldi Cafe.
The court also held that the term of i'm
| prisonment Of the defendant shall begin
from the date of his arrival at the psni-
tentiary to which ne was sentenced. Price
| was sentenced to a term of three years.
In what have come TO be known as the
! snow cases" Robert o. Hoffman, Thomas
| E. Waggaman, and Thomas NJ. Gale, isrg
| real estate agents, were made defendants
for the purpose of testing the law. In
/ formations were filed against them in the
Police Court, and the matter coming On
ava a lut TOllCe was
sustained by the court. The defendants
| appealed and their appeal was sustained
| by the Court of Appeals.
The opinion of the court was delivered
! by MIR. Justice Morris, who says:
! 1t being very apparent to us that the plaintiffs
\ in error within the puryiew of the act of
Congress IN question, and that in respect of the
several pieces of land mentioned in the informa-
! tiohs they are not amenable the penalties OF
the act, II is unnecessary for US to express any
opinion the broader question Of the constitu-
tlonality of the enactment 10 those TO whom
the provisions OF the act might be held properly
TO apply
We prefer 10 wait until a case arrives in which
the determination of that question becomes
necessary, especially in view Of the fact that the
emergency to which the statute relates is not like
ly TO arise again for many months, and it may be
deemed expedicnt by those having such matters
in charge TO apply 10 Congress for additional leg
islation 10 remove the inequalities and correct
the infirinities OF the existing statute.
The cab stand case. that OF Frank Curry,
cab driver, appellant, against the Dis
trict came before the court on an appeal
from a judgment of the Police Court rem
dered in proceeding instituted for the
purpose of testing the validity of an ordi-
nance or regulation made by the District
Commissioners with reference to the hack
or cab stand adjacent to the Sixth Street
railway station. The court holds that the
commissioners were not justified in con-
ceding exclusive cab stand privileges to
the Philadelphia. Wilmington and Balti-
more Railroad Company, and reverses the
judgment of the Police Court.
In the opinion the history of the case is
rehearsed, and 1t is stated that a hack or
cab stand had been established for years
on the two streets adjoining the station at
which any licensed hack or cab might To-
cate. 1t is stated that the claim was made
hat . b..
poorly and ineificiently performed and
that. therefore. new cab service with
newer and better vehicles and a superior
arrangement was instituted by the Phila-
delphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Rail-
road, a link OF the PENNSYLVANIA Railroad
1t is shown that the company sought to
obtain from Congress an exclusive license
10 occupy the stand. which was refused.
although 1t enacted joint resolution. ap-
proved June T. 1885 TO empower the Dis
trict Commissioners to take action in the
matter Assuming 10 act in pursuance of
the law, the Commissioners. October 90
last, enacted regulation which set apart
the desired stand for the exclusive use of
the Philadelphia Wilmington and BaIti-
more Railroad Company cab system.
Inc contention OF the appellant was:
FIRST, that the joint resolution was uncon-
stitutional and void; second that the
Commissioners regulation is unconstitu-
uonal, unreasonable. contrary TO public
policy, and void, and third, that the evil
dence failed to show that the appellant
was guilty of any offence
The court sustains all these points and |
holds, concerning the latter, that the act |
charged against the appellant is not con-
stltuted criminal offence or misdemeanor, |
punishable with any penalty under District |
laws and regulations. AS TO the second
point, the court states that the Commits |
sioners' regulation is not in any proper !
sense authorized by the Joint resolution.
and that the Philadelphia, Wilmington |
and Baltimore Railroad which was given |
the exclusive privilege, is not in the cate |
CORY OF railroad companies specified in the |
latter act.
In connection with this case. in discuss |
ing the power of Congress to legislate for |
the District the court stated that its |
power is limited by all the express guar
antees of individual right contained in the |
Federal Constitution. Grants of exclusive /
privileges to one person which prevent
others from possessing some right to which
otherwise they would be entitled are not
within the power of Congress.
In the case of Davis against Harper and 4
others the decree Of the lower court is |
affirmed In Bechman against Wood the |
decision of the Commissioner of Patents |
is modified and the proceedings in the |
Patent Office are ordered to be reformed |
in conformity with the opinion of the !
Court of Appeals