Waterbury evening Democrat., 1904-12-23
SLIPPERY SIDEWALKS.
Landlord and Tenant Lock to ths2
 City for Relief.

It would be good thing for real
 estate owners if Judge Burpee would stick to his threat with reference to
 the sidewalk cleaning question. The | city has an easement over all the roads and walks in Waterbury and is res Isponsible for their condition, as any, | body can sec who notes the turn Of thinks taken when somebody falls in l hole in the street or sidewalk. Not 1 Withstanding this private property owners have been maintaining walks | at their own expense and the thing has gone on so long nearly everybody :; except the lawyers has come to regaru the sidewalk as the property of the | person who owns the house or lana
 abutting on it. Every tenant is Will-
 ing to concede, that the landlord owns
 the sidewalk when it comes to clean-
 ing it, to say nothing of building ana
 repairing the same, but 1t is quite dit. l ferent when it gets down to using it. IIa 1 the latter case all claim and enjoy rights ! in common on the sidewalks, and the man who would take any other ground
 would be called a fool. The law as 1t now stands obliges the owner or the l tenant to clean the walks, and while
 it is not right that either should do it, | still it is as fair to one as to the other, |
 aimed at in preference to the tenant
 is because he is supposed to have little equity in his holding and conse, | qnently is a better mark for the prose. cutor than the tenant. There are I about 5000 rate payers in Waterbury l and the population is something in the neighborhood of 60,000 souls. A small
 portion of the improved property has
 sidewalks abutting on it and these are
 constructed at the expense of about 1 2,00O rate payers. What about all the 1 other rate payers who have no walks | in front of their homes, as well aA
 those who pay taxes on personal prop erty. and the number is very large? | The whole of them use the walks ana every mothers son of them should be
 compelled to pay something toward re- l pairing and cleaning them. The Reai Estate and Land Owners association should take hold of this question and see that justice is done all around. The
 owner of a building has no more claim 1 to the sidewalk than he has to the street. No lawyer will dispute this
 and no citizen, tenant or boarder who wants to be fair with his fellow ma1a would care to say that the whole bur- l rest upon the shoulders O. less than half the rate payers who own houses. The proper thing to do | is enforce the law as 1t stands and after the present winter is over the injustice of it will be so apparent that i tenant and landlord will agree that 1t should be changed. But in the mean
 time the walks will need little sano,
 and no good citizen should run counter l with the law because he believes 1t Is oppressive. Live up to It. but continue to preach of its unfairness and fair
 minded men will look into it and see l that justice is done. It looks hard to see tenant fined for refusing to clean a sidewalk which he does not own, and 1 it is not nice thing to fine landlord for neglecting to clean sidewalk
 which he does not own. That's the sit uation in nutshell.
 A Waterbury man just returned l from 8 visit to Worcester, Mass, says he will pay the expenses of the board. Of aldermen and the department of
 public works if they will make a trip. to that place with him and see how 1 the officials handle the sidewalks in ] such weather as this. Instead of let l ting the whole police force loose up- on private citizens, the city has gangs 1 of men out bright and early every
 morning when the walks are slippery | ] o'clock the job Is finished. Storekeep-
 CTS and others who want things up to
 date about their premises shovel the walks and sweep them, but they are
 not obliged to do 1t. The city cleans 1 the walks and crossings as soon as it can and if some are little behind
 that is nothing property owners have I to do with What a blessing it l would be for the police and everybody ] else if this were so in Waterbury. At
 this time when people want to be hap py the police have half the people in 1 town almost crazy about the walks.
 The officers are not/to blame and the
 so-called owners of the sidewalks are i not responsible for the trouble, either.
 The remedy is in the hands of the board of aldermen and the people
 should request them to see that it is
 applied