The Coeur d'Alene press. (Coeur d'Alene, Idaho) 1892-1907, 1903-06-06
DECIDES WATER QUESTION
La the boise city sprinkIinE Case Court
Of Appeals Hands Down D-eision
Ca.s of Interest Ia Occur d'AIsne.

The United States circuit court Of
appeisls at San Francisco. hadned
down an opinion affirming the iudg
ment u the circuit court in the case
Of the Boise City Artesian Hot a Cold
Water company. limited. IS. Boise
City, Idaho la rendering its decis
Ion the court says
'Coneesiing that the city still pos
sesses, notwithstanding this statute.
the right ~ dealing with the water
company as il did. and to recognize
the privilege 70 granted by it's ondin-
anee Of October 3, 1883. ar absolvinR
The company from the obligation Gre
aisd by the statute. proposition
which may we'll h. qnesi toned. il still
had the right nj amy time 10 revoke
the privilege 50 granted To the East
mats, or 60 impose upon the corpora
iion neN duties a. condition II lie
further exercise 81 the right 10 oc-
eupy the streets for furnishing water
We bold that II did impose such new
obligations by its ordinance passed
ia March, 1900. granting 10 the com
ilany the RICH, TO lay pipes IN the
streets aud 20 ooileci charges for
water rnpplier to the inhabitants, and
requiring IL 80 furnish water for city
purposes iree Of charge
IA IL immAierial that THAI ordi
nance aas not requested by the cor
pa1aiion and nas never accepted by
~. there wac nothing Ia prevent the
city from imposing upon the corpora
ilon The obligations which the general
statutes imposed upon al corpora
tians 81 like nature.
1t IL immsteriai tina, under the
lave Of Idaho such corporations are
denomlnAted private corporations
The nsmo by which they are called
desc not change their attitude toward
be public. nor does II affect the na
tor" If their rights aud duties, They
arr none the loss subject "a legisla.
tive and municipal control
MNAfF Ab' A'tAtAAtAAF va ~ ~ NUN
inE Ia show that Peter Soma enjoys
franchise from the city which gives
him privileges not POSSESSED by the
plaintiff la error, ar from which IL
may he sscn that the latter j. denied
the cqnal protection Of the Laws -
A similar decision wRs rendered Ia
the hin iu equity between the same
parties.
The case Of the Arterian Hot 4
Cold Water company " Boise City.
decided In san Francisco in favor Of
the city Of Boise. involves the right
u the city 10 be furnished water by
the company for fire purposes, stree,
sprinkiine and other public necessi
tiee without charge, Suit Was brought
spriukline purposos II raised all
the questions al issue between The
city aud the company judge
Benily gave Judgment la favor Of the
city. aud the affirmation II this jnde
ment by the circuit court If appeal,
disposns of the long controversy.
The decision l. 81 much Importance
~ defining absolutely the rights 81
cities ur towns IN their relations t.
private water companic- The ca>s
grew ont " the refusal of Boise 10 ia,
for water which II took from hydrants
tor street rprinkline The decision
sustained the city Ia It's refusal {,
pay for such water aud gives i, th,
absolute right To take water from tn,
maths o. the company under the stat
ute oi the state no matter what term,
it's orciionanccs may contain.
uts last Hove Realized.
PROM the seminal. Gebo. Mont
In the first opening of Oklahoms
to settlers In 1859. the editor of thir
paper was among the many seeker
| after f,,tt,sna xthn mazda Cha hi.y ran.