The morning journal-courier., 1908-02-14
ACTION IS NOT
 DUTY OF ROGERS Corporation Counsel Holds He Should Not Prosecute
 Vestibhle Law
 Violation. ANSWERS LEIGH LETTER Complainant Declared Car Here Was Unprotected and That the City Counsel Should Enforce
 the Law.
ANSWERS LEIGH LETTER

In an opinion handed down yesterday afternoon Corporation Counsel Edward H. Rogers holds that it is not his duty as corporation counsel to prosecute the street railway company for any alleged violation of state regulations regarding the vestibuling of cars. Tine matter came before the city counsel through a request for an opinion from the city clerk on behalf of the board of alder men to whom Walter Leigh addressed a letter short time ago declaring tha; a certain ear operated on the local lines was not vestibuled which he held to be violation of state law and inqulring if the corporation counsel should not be instructed by the board or aldermen tc enforce the law requiring a vestibuie on all ears. MT. Rogers holds that the matter of vestibuling comes entirely under the state railroad commission and that the violation or an order tol vestibules is not to be enforced by the attorney for the city but by the state as the violation Is of state provision and the state receives the nne therc- for
 The opinion in full reads:
 Feb s, 1908. James J. Devine, esq, City Clerk.
 New Haven, Conn.
 Dear Sir
 l have your commGnIcation of the 9th inst in which is referred to me a letter from MT. Walter Leigh address ed to the honorable board ol aldermen asking if the state has not enacted a law that all cars shall be closed in and inquiring ii the corporation counsel should not be instructed by the board of aldermen to enforce the law
 In reply l beg to say: The sole and exclusive jurisdiction over, the inclos- ing and vestibuling of the platforms oi street railway cars is vested in the railroad commissioners or the state who have the power to order platforms to be so inclosed and the neglect or refusal of d street rail~ay company to comply with any order of the railroad commissioners in relation to such plat forms involves forfeiture payable to the state The legislation on this sub ject is found in Sections 3s69 and 3S7C of the General Statutes. Revision oi 1902, and is as follows;
 Sec. Ss69 When the railroad com missioners deem it necessary, in the interests of the public, or of the em- ployos concerned, that the platforms Q, any or all of the ears operated by any street railway company should be pro tected by gates or vestibules, or that lenders should be placed upon such cars. said commissioners may order the company operating such cars to inciosr the platforms thereon with gates or vestibules, or both, or to place lenders upon such ears, of such kind and in such manner as they may deem nee essarr, and proper, first giving such company reasonable notice to appear and be heard, and may, after similar notice, modify or revoke any such or der. The commissioners shall have sois and exclusive jurisdiction over the in closing of such platforms and the placing of lenders on such cars; but nothing in this section shall prevent any such company from incloslng its platforms or placing lenders on its cars without such order.
 Sec 3S70 Any company operating such car or cars which shall neglect or refuse to comply with any order re- lating to platforms made pursuant tc Section 3s69 shall forfeit to the state twenty five dollars for each day of such neglect or refusal"
 Acting under this statute, the board of railroad commissioners have enact ed orders, copies of which l have pro cured and herewith transmit to you. do not understand that the enforce ment of the statute, or of any orders made under it, or the collection of tn. penalty for the refusal to comply with the orders, belongs to the office of the corporation counsel
 Respectfully submitted,
 EDWARD H. ROGERS. Corporation Counsel