Albuquerque weekly citizen. (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1891-19??, 1900-03-17

Joined ~ any competsnt court from
maintaining a nuisanse The anplica.
/ ton ~ irst ieeai principles weuld en-.
Join either the city Of Aibuaueraus 0r
the owners of the aficgos aeeaula frsm
maintaining nuisance The applleas
liar case the supreme court Of the
United States said In such cases.
prescription. whatever the length OF
time, has no application. Evety day .
continuance 10 new uflcnka. and Ii IL
no Justification that the party come
planning came voluntarily within ta
reach. Pure air and comfortable en-
ioyment Of property are az much rights
belonging TO u as the right Of posses.
sion and 0ccupany II population.
where there was none before, APP
proachca nuisance, u he the duty %
those liable ~ once 90 put an end to
IL Northwestern Fortillging Co. vs.
Hyde Park. 81 q. g.. t5g. There 10 no
authority 10 be found authorizing mu.
nicipal corporations. either TO license
a public nuisance or 60 defend against
one maintained by itself. upon the
ground VI any contract it may have
made. Another ground for the reton-
ton of this ditch IL that q IL necessary
to carry on storm water. The only
time there has been any considerable
storm water within the past ten Or
twelve years, q ala not carry u OF
The streets would carry on the ord.
mary rain fan untn u sinks into the
ground ana the public had better haz.
zard the chances OF al occasional OK
ira accumulation of water every ten or
Twelve years thar % maintain this nui,
aance 60 public health and comfort
IL 10 also said that the people own
Ing property on the ditch are to pay
the expense OF abatlnE this nuisance.
have no doubt they will be very glad
10 do 20. and the proper way 10 abate
t Is TO on Il up The city prohibits
this from being done, and appeals 20
the courts TO prevent Il. Ii the city
would adopt the policy OF nnlng q up.
the owners of the premises over and
AUDITING on the ditch can be made to
DO 80 without compulsi0n. I insist that
even II the ciiy can, as matter OF
law, Keep this ditCh open. n ought not
20 do 90. ] entertain no doubts. how
ever az 10 the result of the suit against
the city now In the supreme court. The
city attorney admitted from intlma-
AtHNF maui ny kNf COURT when III was
argued that the decision would be ad
verse e. the aity. ana II would be- nee
cessary 10 Rbate the nuisance The
present attempt 10 clean 70 Is an at
tempt 90 abate a. ~ ~ perfectly
clear that EFFORTS 10 clean "a Will never
abate a. The plea 81 poverty of the
city etc, and storm water has kept Il
just as Il is ever since the town was
Incorporated. The same pleas viii |
Keep q just an it is Tor years o. come. |
unless the people elect city govern /
men that viii cause Il % be filled up |
OF the courts compel 70 ta bee done.
The Griegos acequia preteSt ~ one |
that never was urged until the present !
litigation There a. nothing In % but |
a prctext II Il was necessary to do 50 |
provision for this water could be cas-
ily made by diycrting Il above town. /
so Il could be used Tor irrlgating trees 1
On the streets and private yards and /
gardens. Few communities would be 4
willing 30 waste this water. The cost /
would be trlning / am reliably In
formed hat arrangements can be made
10 run IL Into the Burcllaa acequia
above the city and thus dispose Of IL
w b. CH!LDERS