The evening times., 1900-03-09
TO REIMBURSE DENVER.
a bill FayOrably Reported by the
House Committee on GIaims.

House Committee on diaims.
The Committee on Claims of the House
has presented favorable report on bill
| to repay to the city of Denver the sum
| of $4,000 for amounts of judgments ii has
been compelled to pay for damages incur
red by reason OF negligent construction by
the United States of sidewalks adjacent to
the postofice building in that city. Upon
the completion of the postofTice building in
the city of Denver the Government caused
/ to be constructed adjacent thereto a
cement sidewalk with considerable slope
toward the street. 1t was finished SO
smoothly as to become dangerous when
ever any snow fell.
Bridget Hickey and Matilda Human at
different times fell upon this sidewalk
sustaining serious injury and damage.
They brought suit against the city OF Dem
yer TO recover damages, and obtained
judgments in the district court. and upon
appeal to the court of appeals of the
State of Colorado the judgments were af-
hrmed. On the 10Th day of January. 1898,
the city paid in full satisfaction of the
judgment in favor of Bridget Hickey, ST.
ZS6.S9, and on the same day paid, in sat
lsfaction of the judgment in favor of Ma
tiida Human, the sum of S1.S77O.
According TO an ordinance of the city OF
Denver. the owners Of lots fronting upon
streets are required to construct. at their
own expense, sidewalks. and to keep and
maintain the same in good repair. Upon
any defect in a sidewalk being discovered
the proper city official has the right to
serve notice upon the owner to repair the
nj hog. of
hours, and upon failure of the owner so to
do the city can either prefer a complaint
against the owner and have him fined for
failing to repair the same or the city
can do the work Itself and can create
lien upon the adjacent property for the
amount it has been compelled to expend
in labor OF course. the city has no such
rights as against the United States. 1t
cannot compel the United States Govern
ment to repair a sidewalk in front of its
premises.
Il an accident occurs by reason Of de-
feet in the construction OF a sidewalk the
party injured can sue the city and the
owner of the adjoining property. or he can
sue the city alone In the event that the
party injured recoYeTs damages from the
city, the city has an acticn against the
property owner whose duty it was under
the ordinance to keep the sidewalk in re-
pair. for the amount IL has been COM
PEELED TO pay 10 such injured person. The
law is clear that such rights exist where
the defect IS in the original construction
Of a sidewalk built by the owner of the ad-
jacert property. The city has no recovery
against the Government in court under
the Tucker act. as that act does not au-
thorize recovery for tort.
The committee in its report says: 1T
Is true the committee has received COM
from the Treasury Department
IN which it denies liability in such cases !
which letter is hereto annexed. But your
committee does not see why the Govern |
ment should be relieved from a liability of |
this kind, when private individual act |
ing in the same manner and owning the |
property similarly situated. would be COM |
PEELED TO pay To the city the amount OF !
the judgment recovered against it for dam |
ages caused by negligent construction OF a |
sidewalk put down by the owner of the |
property. In this case the officials OF the !
had full knowledge of the !
dangerous character Of this sidewalk. a. |
is shown from the report OF the custodian |
Of the building in Denver, set forth in /
he letter of Secretary Gage.
And before the officials at the postoffice |
would consent TO even let the city remedy !
the defect. the custodian was compelled to !
write to the Treasury Department to as
certain whether il would object to the |
rity remedying the defect by Toughenng /
he sidewalk. These cases against the city
were fought by the city attorney and ap-
peals taken to the proper appellate court
of the State. and from the opinion in the
appellate court it is clear that the city
ne elected no rights it had to defeat the
plaintiffs.
LAS a private individual owning the same
property would, under the law OF the State
IF Colorado have been compelled 10 reim-
Durse the city for the amount it had TO
pay, We see no reason why the Govern
nent in good morals and equity should not
pay the same amount. AS the amount paid
oy the city in satisfaction of these judg
nents and costs amount to SS,114.55, we
hink the bill should be amended to con-
orm Herewith, and also to state the |
ude -nents so satisfied by the city Of Den