Evening capital. (Annapolis, Md.) 1884-1910, 1907-12-04
MRS. JFFHRS LOSES CASE
COURT or APPEALS HAMS
DOWN. OPIEIOE
Hgf5s NmssL1pzffg Eiz3 Poser 50 Pas
Cr6zz-1e fsT Csff EsIfsi<
RzlnaT
THE OPIHIOE IL DETAIL SAYS
COMPANY = LIABLE fOR
FOR Any DAMAGES II
CAUSES

CAUSES
- r1r eaflsas er51l1s Esa.1s..
zosn fa tzs reGrs 90 Arce1ls go
usrnfne tAe gIxewar NegEs tsE A-Es
ars1.lsf egaEsg wes assral1a4 -
xrart1ag . GersGrres - ear elA f-e-
/ - sfrs- A11e a. ge1eFs a-4 s1aeTs-
r1ar4veFs - fae cay - 4a1zrasl IS
zr4 ssslEsnss aIgez fae sgs1s - -
v. E.1aaFsgTfCg. BaEtas1ege 1a1 4-GaDc $
f.Isezrle B45lwag GDnsrzlng- - ~sae8
tEsv so1zaf % ezlsfH fae fs-zg.-1T
Groni lagfEg 80 trze4s azlsr sae eE-
linznee rsesssiy Ezsssi - tls 1l9Tsrs
C01nsellcT zzf Essssrmea - rse fl1F
- t-~ soC5ls-
4ae enszsiGn TemoreA seesy b1r
aEslnst tE.e eo1sGszetioE - ~ re1.--
Jg1zs Ye1ree -Esss f.e ecin5on -
safrs t-s ~ aaCllez6le 20 sAe ezas
- sfzseI Sn = sgessnes rlaZNsE- s1s
if 81 stated fsaf - s&r,v dseasio1 =
4fs~a 80 zeegBGE ~ tse iaargE1aEs
3. sstgie 6stsrssts i8eoigeIs au1 sgas .
fsgler oDsnlg1 wlll 81 Sled laser-
TBs .lsglsl0n holds snaa ere 1sanf@a-
ss4l xessrlsuz bes1y ~ Annapolis 831
ample powes - pas ise ofeiiSar@s
81 aa .fsGw- Tie 0gsnA01 says
question - fhe Dss9sr - tfle 2fzTsE
ar4 city fsoauell g. zBaos fise KfzBehfss
vfeea fu aae 0Fgluanes referred fg
III tfszl p0wer exists lt ezHaoa be Re-
sts4iasl Or de[ealeI ~ any eo1siaeF-
alton - policy o. expeIleEeys oE 1sV
nsere regard for fisc wisises - prefer
enees y the svpellants-
THE r1fIway company Was lne0r-
poFzgeI under tAe general laws -
MARYLAND on 1faF -, fs51, with an
fbOritv - construct . railroad, tl.e
seFm5n5i ~ which sbOaid be = point
on - near TIE eastern boundary ~ tie
District u coiBmbia and 3 point in %
contiguous ~ the city - Annapolis %
ths severn river ard tiIe charter pro-
ided that lbe said railroad shOuid
pass through tie counties ~ Prince
George and Anne Arundel and fhe
city ~ Annapolis"
py chapter 307 81 tbe Act8 ~ 1900.
ll5e name 81 tlfe railway was changed
and TIE rights grz1etd - tbe Old COM
pznY ~ tire City Council ~ Annapo-
rs were confirmed - tDe company
under SIS new ham. ft was eOBteud-
ed by the appellants that this prgvl-
sf0n vas void ~ IN conflict with see
tf01 - - Au5cis ~ the State Coz
aaitatfon, wfi5cb urOs de- that every
Law enacted ~ tiIe ffeuerai Assembly
shall embrace bst one subject Uhich
shall be Described 81 tbe fisie. The
Court ~ Appeals is0Ids that this OBJ
lection IS not well taken. - All the
sections are gerDJauo - the general
subleet which - sufficiently indicated
and Described ~ the title. Under this
Act, il is held ~ fi5e COurf - AVpezIs
thai tie Mayor aud city Council ~
Annapolis Is vested wifB full p0wsl
10 grant the ffanebises IN question
The COurt holds, IN addition. fba'
witb0gt these Acis--fbe original char
ter afsd amended elIarfer--tf3e right -
the Mayor and city Council - pass
| ibis ordinance eguId not be denied.
Tire charter ~ tbs company granted
under the general i2rs ~ Maryland.
| tire opinion states. 9stboFized the e0r-
strnctfOn % Eoad through fbe Cfty
~ Annapolis. agd II tire city -
withholding its cOBseDt ~ tise eon.
structiOn ~ the ROAD could preTeol
| IL. i would nuIlify the cbarieE grant.
"a under the Act ~ Legislature.
The governing bGdy Of the city kas
| tie right % pass CTdiBanees reason.
ably regulating tte Bse ~ the streets.
the opinion says. but tfe Court states
/ II As SIS opinion that the line iH
question IS a street railway within
i the limits u the Cityof Annapolis
even thoBgb g becomes an inter
urban road when il passes bey0rs
4 those limits.
The opinion boids tbat tiiers - f8r
4 tiser authority Tor the construction q
4 tie Foad Under Section 20 ~ ArffeI'
4 - 81 the general Incorporation laws
1 which provides that II f. become ne
eessary Tor any railway company uD
der is charter - occupy any streets
| lanes Or alleys - any iucorDoEaIe'
tOwn. Il shall be competent Tor ths
company - agree upon terms and e0E
Eiti0us wilh the Municipality, cut
aB agreement 0e not Feseile1. ik sE&l
haze the right - cOn1cn1zfig1- Tb'
| opfuioB says There cguld be -
| nlore effective ard orderly sgrseDBen
fhaB = evidenced in fbe passage q
this ordinance ard is aeeeptsaee.f
Tie opinion aoiIs that f5e eOFlslrze
tfon u TIE Y0ai does noz fupDs. -
/ aIdftlonzI seTsf.1de for whseh e.
company f. liable - IRE abultlD
ur0perty owners. bot III any 9zsEzxe
caase.r by ti,e Constructions - iae roz
Or fis operation ti5e e0upaBT j. Iszbl
fm . civil action
Jsdgss Boyd. Briseoe. ~ehuze<e
aud Durxe eoBcgFFet - the opiuiog
cosnseifor Melvin zrzae1 f.se eSse g.
fse city Is both eogrfs. ard tSe 1sei
sios So each supports bis eeDte-tig1
ard follows flse authorities be cite
and lise proposllfoDs - Iaw s4it sLDwE
NF. Jaues ~ IurKoe Wks ecuree
for fsse p2lnti1e. ard Prank fiosDesl
| Georxe Weerns ~lIiieEDs ard Rohes
Moss apparel fer ~ ss1lwzr eem
Il nanv.