Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-04-09
CITY AUTHORITY FIRST
Decision Against the Chicago
Street Railway.
TUNNEL UNDER The RIVER
Controversy Over Removing or Lower
ing It.
CLEVELAND COMPANY WINS
Claims Control Of Streets Occupied by
It Until the Expiration Of
Its Charter.
TUNNEL UNDER THE RIVER
Controversy Over Removing or Lower
CLEVELAND COMPANY WINS

pei the street railway company OF that city
to remove or lower it's tunnel under the
Chicago river at Van Buren, street. was to-
day decided by the Supreme Court of the
United States against the company, on the
ground that the change is an exercise OF
governmental authority In the interest OF
the common welfare.
The Chief Justice and Justices Brewer.
White and McKenna dissented.
The proceeding in this case grew out Of
an effort on the part of the city of Chicago
the agent OF the United States govern
ment to compel by mandamus the street car
company to remove It's tunnel from under
the Chicago river. or to lower it. The pro-
ceeding was taken at the instance of the
national government because of it's decision
to deepen the channel of the river The
time fixed for the removal is the 10Th In
slant, after which time II 1t Is not removed
the street car company Win be required
to pay penalty OF $4,000 month.
In the trial Of the case the company adj
mitted the ownership Of the land where the
tunnel is located by the city, but contend
ed that as, at the time the tunnel was
constructed, it was a lawful structare,
neither the city of Chicago, the state of II
linois or the United States has power to
compel its removal without compensation.
1t was therefore pleaded that interference
with the tunnel would be a violation of
contract
The state supreme court did not accept
the company's contention, and the case
was brought to the federal Supreme Court
by the railroad company on a writ OF er-
ror
The opinion of the court was by Justice
Harlan.
Justice Harlan's Reasoning.
After announcing that there was no diff
Guilty in the way of the courts assumption
of jurisdiction in the case Justice Harlan
I,e Of ha railr NJ
pany to be that the judgment of the SUI
preme court of Illinois against the company
was contrary both to the contract clause of
the Constitution and the provision of the
fourteenth amendment prohibiting the TAX
ing of private property without due process
of law He then recited the city ordi-
nances under which the tunnel was con-
structed, following them with an act of
Congress directing the deepening of the
channel of the river and the ordinances
adopted for the purpose of carrying the
legislation into effect.
On the point of violation of contract
Justice Harlan said that there was In the
ordinance of 1883, under which the tunnel
was built mo clause or provisions which
so restricted the power of the city that 1t
could not require the railroad company TO
lower or remove the tunnel when the pub
Hc-interests, as involved In the unobstriict-
ed navigation of Chicago river, demanded
that to be done"
He added: Apart from any question as
to the power or the city TO bargain away
or surrender its authority to improve nayi-s
cation and protect It against obstruction
the railroad company must be held to have
accepted the ordinance and constructed the
tunnel subject to the requirement that
navigation should not be iuterrupte by 1t.
AS the present tunnel is an obstruction to
the use OF the river by many boats and
vessels employed in commerce on the
lakes and as, by the ordinance in question,
the city did not stipuiate-even If 1t could
lawfully have stipulated-that 1t would not
exert whatever powers it had in order to
protect the free navigation of Chicago
river whenever 1t became necessary
proper to do so, the result must be that the
execution of the order to lower or remove
the tunnel would not impair the obligation
of any contract protected by the Constitu-
ton of the United States.
IF. in the ordinances of 1888 the city
had stipulated that 1t would meet the ex-
pense of any alteration of the tunnel made
by Its direction, different question would
have been. presented. But the ordinance
cannot be construed as containing such a
stipulation and consistently with the set
tied doctrines of this court no such stipu-
Iation can arise from mere Implication
There 10 in our Judgment, no ground what
ever for holding that the city, by the ordi-
nance of 1888 came under the obligation of
a contract to meet the cost of any changes
In the tunnel that might be lawfully re-
quired in order that the rive could be
safely navgated by large vessels
Cleveland Company Wins.
The case of the City of Cleveland vs.
the Cleveland Electric Railway Company
was decided today by the court in favor of
the company. The case involved the right
of the city to grant a charter to a new
street car line to operate in Woodland ave-
nue. In the face of the contention of the
old company that it's charter had not ex--
pired. The opinion was by Justice Nc
Kenna.
This ca so presentad nbosa 90 +bo oseo-.
to force three-cent fares on the street rail-
ways in Cleveland. The electric company
claimed the control of the streets of the
city until 1908. and the action was begun
by the company to contest the grant of
charter by the city to the Forest City COM
pany for line along Woodland avenue
the Old company attacked this charter as a
violation OF It's contract with the city
under Its own charter, and charged the
granting of it to be "a part OF the con-
sptracy between the city and the Forest
CITY company to compel the old company
to submit to three-cent fares.
The old company asked the courts to
declare the new company's charter to be
null and void and to restrain 1t from
prayer and the city appealed to the SUI
preme Court, with the result of securing
an affirmation of the decision against it.
Senator Patterson's Case.
In the case of United States Senator
Thomas M. Patterson of Colorado a mo-
ton was filed today I'm the court on be-
half of the people of Colorado for the
dismissal of the case or the affirmation OF
the verdict of the supreme court of that
state Mr.. Patterson is under sentence to
Pay a fine of $1,000 on the charge of con-
tempt of the state supreme court The
motion was taken under Amusement
Absentees From the Bench.
Owing to the absence of Chief Justice
Fuller and Justice Brewer on account of
indisposition, the calling of the docket of
original cases In the court, which was set
for today, was postponed until next Mon
day. In case No. of that docket the
state of Maryland against the state of
West Virginia, involving the BOUNDARY,
line between the two states. stipulation
was filed agreeing to finish the taking of
testimony by the first of next August.