Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1900-01-02
SNOW AND ICE LAWS
Liability Of Agents Of Property Under
Consider alton,
TIE ATTENTION OF CONGRESS- INVITED
Opinion Of Court Of Appeals Re-
versing Police Court.
LEGISLATION IS IMPERFECT

|
MI,
Inc at'eh'ioi VI congress VIII De III
vited by the District Commissioners. 1t Is
ApneaIs rendered. eayar,1 rno,+bs 600 in
.hrao -. - 49, -.
e III WHICH 'he qoe7'ioh VI .he
'aiui'S oi what are known as the sno"
and Ice laws was raised particularly to
| the liability of agents of property. These
.cts zvera annro,,.d r.s,.at;,,o1, ,s,r,. :,
1oo- 80 &c. N'ai vi -
1850 ana Marcn . 1884, ana PROVIDE, among
June, 'i.nss' 'ha' the owners tenants OF
shau a,,r,r - e.. ta,, wv. So :. 49,.
of,an en- - -. ~. 49, y. ua' s-.
soid sid.,,.ILs ~ 600 :. .. - .
and sbau n,hsn TIA safat,, - uodostr;ans
90 rc.1,,ir.. ,,.,,,,.1o 49, .,no,i.eu.s .,s;,,
sand ~ sron nthar n,.tani., &c Vii ,,sura
sucb sofo,,
For Iailure TO remove the snow the
owner, tenant or agent of the property Is
made subject to a fine, and the acts further
provide that, in the event of the refusal or
failure of the owner tenant or agent to
remove the snow or cause it to be removed
it shall be the duty of the District Commits
sioners to have the same removed and to
,,ro,,o. % ~. NC: s's"iiiSt .ie
other taxes on real estate are collected
here
eral instances have the snow removed from
the sidewalks in front of a number of
pieces of property and taxed the cost there
Of y, against them They were enabled to do
appropriations made by Congress but the
acts in question, while making # the dutv
of the Commissioners to so act, do not car
ry win them any appropriation out of
necessary funds to nav the % morErn a,a a .lae
ployed, nor has Congress enabled them to
do the work by any other act since the en-
actment OF the two laws
Opinion of Court of Anne.I.
Rnt tb,s fault ot tho ,o..
- - -, u INC "''o 10 NOT ny any
means .he ohiy one IL would appear from
the decision OF Shhe Court of Appeals. In
this decision rendered in cases where tbree
real estate aoen+s u,e-. e., 49, 80.
-. cite. i'ieu last winter
~, iaie " nave 'he sno" removed from
Sidewalks in front of properties which they
respectively had for rent or sale Mr. JUS
tce MOTIFS speaking for the court, said:
II is not often that in so short a stat
ute as this which We have cited there
are found so many cruditieS and inconSiSt-
enc1es; and we cannot but suppose that
Congress has been led into it's enactment
without due consideration. in reliance upon
Its promoters and upon the good purpose
which it was evidently intended to subserve.
,oo.;n w a. - open 70 .ae grave o.
fails to reach non-resident ownars nf va'
cant land or unoccupied property, and
makes no provision for the removal of
tbe 5000 ire iionii 'ne sioewaiks IN front OF
property Of the Tinted States for abicb
some such provision is as much required
Tor the purposes of the act, as for the side
walks IN front or private property"
Reversing the INDIGNANT
T. .ou, ~,
III ie'eisiiis 'iie Judgment OF the lower
the Pollce Court, the appellate tribunal
said through Mr.. Justice Morris:
eft being verv annarent tn -, tho. ~
plaintiffs in error are NOT within ~ 10
view of the act Of conrrass IN 1,1a,tp;
and that in resnect of The sa,,ara, dio ~
land mentioned in the inforroatiops ~ VI
are not amenabIe To tbe nenaItios op 10y
act II is unnecessary for re 70 axnro -
opinion on the broader nuestion ~ ~ a a'
stitutionalitv Of the enactmant &c ~ .hoo
to whom the nrovisions of the .ct ,,i,ht b
held pronerIv tn AMY '0' sN' NC
I'VE nrefer to uait ,n+i, j., o,,o o, l.,
which the determinatinn % 80 a. 80 ~
becomes necessarv asnaotau, a. Iues.4oi ~
the fact that The e,,araa,o' IL VIZ" ~
statute relates iS not ifIai' ~ III Msii1ii ee
for manv n,onths 80 4. ~ d l asain
exnedient bv tbnsa ba',,e, aiScs De . uesnigu
cbarea 70 annI,, -, E astIIs sun ma .Iers III
Io,.;.IS.; hfi! " Az eauui liohdi