Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1901-08-08

PHONE COMPANY WRIGGLES
ROUND A COURT DECISION.
THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE
Neenah Business Men Who Win
Their Suit Only to Find Them
selves CircumVented by Their
Willy Opponent-Case Which At
tracts Very General interest.

Wisconsin readers are to some ex-
tent acquainted with the case
Of M. W. Kruger and M.
E. Barnett of Neenah against
the Wisconsin Telephone company,
growing out Of the erection of a teIe-
phone pole in front Of Kruger G
Barnett's store in Neenah. These
gentlemen own the principal drug
store in that city. In April, 1895, the
telephone company, against the pro-
test of the street commissioners and
mayor Of the city and against the
emphatic protest and objection Of the
owners of the property, erected
large pole on the drugstore corner.
Kruger G Barnett brought an action
against the company to compel it TO
remove the pole. 1t was shown on
the trial that the pole was a serious
obstruction and great nuisance to
property owners, blanketing and OBJ
structing the view Of some of their
large show windows, besides causing
the stringing of a great number Of
wires in close and inconvenient
proximity to the upper story Of the
building.
The jury to which certain questions
were submitted. found that the cree
ton of this pole interfered with the
owners enjoyment to their building
and was a damage to the property,
materially decreasing it's rental
value. The jury put the damages at
81 per week and found that the pole
had been erected in spite of the OBJ
lection and protest of the owners of
the property, and that the erection Of
the pole at another point, while not
the approved plan of the company,
would have been practicable.
In the supreme court it was
definitely settled that this proceeding
on the part Of the telephone company
was high-handed and unlawful, and
that the comapny had no right to con-
fscate mans property, and that the
pole erected constituted a burden
upon the property, and should be re-
moved. The supreme court also
ordered the removal Of the pole.
This accordigly ought to have ended
the matter The supreme court, as
the form of procedure requires, di-
retced the circuit court of WinnebagO
county to enter a judgment ordering
the removal of the pole. From this
judgment the telephone company ap-
pealed to the supreme court and. as
subsequent events show. and, for the
purpose Of delay; for upon the day of
hearing it put in no appearance and
| the appeal was dismissed.
The object of the company, how
ever, was accomplished During the
time which elapsed, by reason Of the
| appeal, the legislature Of the state
had assembled, and the telephone
company had secured the passage of
an act allowing it to condemn land
| and to erect poles in spite of and
| against the protest Of the property
| owners. The telephone company now
seeks under this act to continupe in
place the pole which the supreme
| court more than one year ago ordered
to be removed. The keeping in place
of the pole will probably be accom-
plished, as a commission has been ap
pointed by Judge Burnell to examine
into the compensation due to Kruger
| & Barnett.
Kruger & Barnett will urge before
the commission that they are en-
titled in any event as damages to a
least the sum fixed by the jury, one
dollar a week, as a just compensa
ton, and in addition will claim {;
| compensation for the permanen
damages and taking Of thei
property.
The case is the first one to be con
tested under the new act. and it is
mattor Of great Importance to al
property owners in these days wher
our streets are invaded by TELEGRAPH
and telephone poles. Kreuger &
Barnett have made a gallent fight il
favor Of the rights Of the propert,
owners against this corporation an
i the outcome Of this proceeding will b
watched with general interest.