The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1904-07-23
OHAGE TO ENFORCE
SMOKE ORDINANCE
Supreme Court Declares Com.
missioner Has Right to-
Regulate Nuisance

Ihe supreme court of Minnesota
esleroay, IN decision written by Jus
tlce Lovely, affirms the district court
~ ~ nanhsey county UNFOLDING the valid
10y VI the se-called smoke ordinance
~ ' raul and DR.. Ohage says the
law viii be rigidly enforced.
| Inc lower court is affirmed in every
respect, and DR.. Ohage, health officer
/ Oh 81. Paul, who has prosecuted the
case through the various courts and
| established the right of the civ To
| regulate the volume of smoke from
| the tall ehinlneys, is highly elated at
'ii6 successful termination of the suit.
ne suit was fought in all the courts
| py j. e. Michael corporation attorney
| and E. w. Helmes. The decision s s1rs
| tains the validity of Ordinance No.
1881, as amended by Ordinance No.
800, promoting the emission of dense
smoke Within the corporate limits of
the city, and sustains the contention
mat the city has the police power to
| regulate the evil.
In the case, which has been tried in
Tue courts OF the city, county and state.
mute Haugbro, fireman of the Anp,Is
hotel, was the defendant. but the case
was test of the power of the city to
ENFORCE the ordinance The sylIabu
simply declares that the ordinance is
valid exercise of police powers of the
municipality, and the conviction of
Haugbro is sustained.
justice Loveiy's opinion goes into the
case quite thoroughly on its merits.
The court says:
Justice Loveiy's Opinion
The issue on this review is the ax-
ceedlngly simple one, viz. whether the
WORDS OF the ordinance and conpIaint
oense smoke, which are made by de-
PENDANTS contention a deterninatiye
test of sufficiency, fairly imply and
reasonably contemplate in their mean
ing the commission Of acts which con-
sll.ute nuisance and justify restric-
lions under penal consequences.
Unless we. are entirely at fault in
Our apprehension of the significance of
words when used in their accepted
sense, the terms dense smoke suggest
ana reasonably imply much more than
counsel for defendant comedies. While
1t may be true that at times the ennis
sion OF smoke in small quantities from
chImneys maysnot be SO offensive as to
ltseif constitute nuisance, it is not so
easy to see how dense smoke can be
ceptable to the senses of ordinary hu-
mainly, particularly in the residence
portions of community such as this
ordinance was intended to apply.
TO be logical, and to affect, per-
maps, unnecessary learning to aid COM
mon sense and common knowledge, it
would follow that the exhaIation of
vapor from burning vegetables, wood,
coal or peat, crowded together, con-
tanning mich fo,. in
as SCOT, cinders and coal dust exhaIed
from chimneys would necessarily in
Hlct upon the occupants of residences
and apartment houses great discom-
fort, greatly add to the ordinary bur-
dens of urban existence, and fall with
In the ordinarily accepted definition of
a nuisance at common law
Under a municipal ordinance pro-
hlbiting the exhalation of dense smoke
in the city of Chicago the same cues
ton was presented as here, and in dis
posing of the subject the court of last
resort in Illinois held the following
pertinent language applicable to this
controversy, which we approve and
adopt:
Nor will any subtle distinction be
INDUCED as to what is meant by dense
smoke" as those terms are used in the
ordinance. The terms used will be
understood as commonly employed,
and this court will understand by
dense smoke" precisely what every
body else does that has ever seen a
volume of dark, dense smoke as it
comes from the smokestack or CHM
ney where common soft or bituminous
coal is used for fuel in any considera-
Bile quantities.
There are well known devices in
common use for mitigating the evils
caused by dense smoke and the en-
forcement of the ordinance cannot be
said to inf1ict hardshfps upon the con-
SumerS of the materials which occa-
sion the nuisance complained of"
Ohage to Enforce Ordinance
Referring to the decision, and an in
cidental statement by DR.. Charles
Louis Mix, of Chicago, professor of
physical diagnosis of Northwestern
university that smoke murders" are
the result of dense volumes of smoke
in large cities, DR.. Ohage said yester-
day:
The ST. Paul department of health
fully indorses the statement of Prof
Mix, of whose correctness it has had
ample chance to convince itself 1t
must not be understood that smoke in
itself causes consumption, but the in
halation of impure air polluted with
sulphurouS smoke produces an irrita-
ton and condition of the air passages
which makes the person extremely LA
bic to take on the disease.
"As the suppression of the smoke
nuisance is not alone possible, but also
economical, the ordinance will from
now on be vigorously enforced"