The Honesdale citizen. [volume] (Honesdale, Pa.) 1873-1908, 1908-08-27

2 lature and approved by Governor
!. Stuart May 81, 1907, the Mayor having
signed the concurrent resolution passed
. BY councils accepting the provisions OF
, the act. In boroushs the appointment
OF three commissioners TO serve without
. compensation, having exclusive and
, absolute custody and control OF shade
trees within the municipal limits, with
, power to plant, set out, remove, main
tain and care for same, is vested in the
Chief Burgess. The terms OF the first
appointees are for three, four and 6Ve
years respectively, and on the expira-
ton Of any term the new appointment
will be for Eve years. The commission
on deciding upon setting out, removing
or materially changing shade trees in
any highway are required TO give pub
lie notice OF a meeting at which the
contemplated work is TO be considered,
by publication in not to exceed two
newspapers published in the borough
for two weeks before it is held. The
cost OF all work done is charged to the
owner OF the premises in front Of which
the improvement ia made, and becomes
lien on the real estate. Subsequently
to meet the expense Of caring for the
trees, and tine cost of the advertising
mentioned, general tax may be levied
not to exceed onetenth Of one mill on
the dollar of the assessed valuation Of
the borough. IL the provisions Of the
act are accepted by Honesdale, the
Commission will have power to employ
and pay such superintendents, engin-
eers, foresters, tree wardens, and other
assistants as the proper performance Of
their duties may require, and to make
and publish regulations providing pen
alties for violations OF the act, subject
to the approval Of the town council; all
fines and penalties imposed becoming
liens upon the real estate, and collecti-
BILE as taxes upon real prop are now
collected. Honesdale is already 80
thoroughly shaded that it is hardly
probable that our town fathers will see
any necessity for availing Themselves
Of the privileges Of the new act. The
very fact, indeed, that the law had been
N the statute books for considerably
more than year before any municipal
lty accepted its provisions, goes TO show
that it was not crying necessity in
any part of the State.
Tho threatened litigation among
claimants to certain rights in and about
Elk Lake, and The Lake Lodore Co.,
recent purchasers Of the interests OF the
Del. and Hud. Co. in the property, re-
c'lls the litigation growing out OF q
,i1,ilar contention between Asa Dim
ock and the canal company forty -four
years ago. The case was tried before
Judge George r. Barrett, and was an
action of ejectment by the former for
2jS acres Of land in Clinton township.
me plaintiffs claim was based on o
wa rant from the land Office OF Pennsyl-
VA 10, dated September 10, 1851, ard a
ihcl,ion and survey Of tho came, the Both
OF the month, covering and includip &
Elk lake, and patent for the tract
from the Commonwealth to L. W.
o,
1856. The defence was based on war
rrpt to John Taggart. issued Feb 11th,
1874. end returned June eth, 1906, as
surveyed on tract Of land 10 Clinton
tow nship, surrounding Elk Pond"
With the pond laid down as vacant up
on which survey patent was issued to
Samuel Sslter June II, 1907, describing
the land by the exterior lines as contain
iog 25S acres, SO perchee. The title of this
pat,ntee finally became vested in the D.
& Ii. Canal Co.. who entered into posses
slor Of the John Taggart tract, and the
use OF Elk Lake (then called "pond~
" b ch covered part, nearly half, OF the
Uin.ock tract, for fifteen years, as q
feeter to their canal. The survey OF
Jot Teggart was apeculiar one. When
the warrant was laid the outside lines
wero closed and would have embraced
about 800 acres, but in 1907 inside lines
were marked upon the draft, running
par .llel TO the outer ones, the calcula-
tioE made only to the land lying be-
tween them, and 30 returned to the
lani Office as surveyed upon the John
Tai CART warrant. This left an oblong
piece of land in the center, including
lClk lake, not only unappropriated, but
marked Oh the return ELK Pond, va
cant" and it was upon this alleged va
cancy that the Dimock warrant was
laid. Upon this showing Judge Barrett
rul, in favor Of the plaintiff, holding
am Ong other points that the John Tag
gart tract was 80 located as to leave
vac ant land in the center OF it in an OBJ
lons shape; that the owner Of that war
rant was bound by the official return !;
the; the company had no right to oc.
cupy the pond as a feeder to their
canal by virtue of their corporate
privileges, nor greeter right than On in
dividual would have who had acquired
the title to the John Taggart tract Of
land that not only the Elk pond, but
oil Of the land excluded from the John
Tasgart survey, was vacant when the
warrant under which the plaintiff claim
ed was surveyed and that he was there
foro entitled to verdict for 80 much ae
was vacant. The case was taken to the
Supreme Court by S. e. Dimmick and
II. NJ. Crane, attorneys for the D. and
II, Q. Co., Charles P. and George g.
Waller appearing for Mr.. Dimock.
Chief Justice George w. Woodward
delivered the opinion of the court, May
] A. 1854 IL comprised o much more
I ella oorate statement Of the case, and de-
Q ductions to be drawn from the testi
C mony, together with the stepsby which
1 the title passed from Samuel Salter
r the owner Of the Taggart warrant, t
" the d. and Fl. Q. o., through Morton
, and James Archibald. but in the enC
h fully sustained the rulings OF Judge
: Barrett an the verdict and judgmen
below.
o Current rumors are to the effec
o that the trolley line between Honesdal