The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1903-06-12
PLENTY ROOM ON TOP
One Phone Company Cant String
New Wires Beneath Another
Company's,
The Supreme Court Rules on the
Wire War in Mime
apolis.

The Twin City Telephone company must
string its wires from longer poles, so as
to pass over the wires of the Northwestern
Telephone company where they intersect,
rather than under. This is the ultimate
| meaning Of a decision handed down by
the supreme court to-day. The lower court
is sustained in granting an injunction to
restrain the Twin City company from
occupying certain alley. The opinion by
Judge Lovely expressly says that only
this question is decided, but the tone of
the decision favors the older company.
While it does not have "a monopoly of
| aerial space" and the court declines to
pass on its claim that it is entitled to all
the space between it's wires and the
ground, it is held to have prior right
which must be protected "Upon the facts
as found by the court says the opinion,
at appears that the erection and MAIN
tenance of its poles and wires by defend
ant at the street intersections referred to
is an unquestionable interference with the
practical conduct of it's business by plain
tiff and the useful and necessary enjoy
ment of it's franchises which ought not
to be permitted.
LAS between two corporations exercis-
ing similar franchises upon the same
street. priority, tho it does not create
monopoly, carries superiority Of rights,
and equity will adjust conflicting interests
as far as possible controlling them SO that
each company may exercise its own fran
chise as fully is compa tible with the
necessary rights Of another. But where
interference is unavoidable, the latter oc
cupant must give way. $50.
while it is probable that a first con-
structing company might desire to secure
rights to itself that would create a mono
poly Of space by erecting its poles to such
a height as would render it impossible to
go over It's wires. neither the evidence nor
the conclusions of the court show this to
have been done by the plaintiff, and where
| a rivalry exists that creates such situa-
tion the relative privileges of each occu-
pant may be determined by statute or
ordinance and this seems to have been
done in the present instance by the regu-
lation that the poles and wires of the
plaintiff shall be placed under the direc-
ton and approval of the city engineer,
| and the courts must, where there is con-
f1ict, control the actions and the. rela-
| tive rights of the parties as to protect
each in the enjoyment of its franchises,
recognizing, however. the benefits which
accrue by reason of the prior occupancy"
| The syllabus Of the decision reads as
| follows: s -
| Northwestern Telephone Exchange Company
Respondent, VS.. Twin City Telephone Company
First-In the absence of positive regulation by
| Of telephone lines in municipality. the party
first se the gos Acquires hgS
!
in streets. which forbids subsequent occupant
for the purpose to interfere herewith.
second-The prior lawful occupancy of urban
streets by telephone company will not neces
sariv create monopoly Of all the aerial space
which. it appropriatss:, but may give such oc
its business may be required in the growth
and extension OF the same to meet the Immediate
demands of the public, service, subject to the
control Of the courts to restrain another tele
phone company from unnecessary 1nterference
herewith - . = s#,
Third-;Under priviledges granted by the city q
poles and wires in its highways and has from
time to time maintained and extended the same
to meet the necessary requirements sofkits tisi
ness. In 1898, by authority of a charter from
Plaintiff a upon poles at ans
erected its wires irnmed iately Hereunder in sucf
a manner as to, interfere with the prior occu
pant in tho necessary use Of its franchise SO al
to interfere with repairs and additions to NEE
the requirements of the public service Held
that such erection and maintenan,,ee, of it's pole
and wires by defendant was an Illegal impair
ment of the plaintiffs rights, which may b.
Irestrained by Injunction. "
Order affirmed. .-.~,...5. = ...
| ~ --lzt.s Lovely, J.