The Oskaloosa herald. (Oskaloosa, Mahaska County, Iowa) 1885-1919, 1909-06-10

| street but upon the dividing line be-.
tween the park and the street. The
same statute which grants to cities
the power to control their streets
gives also In like terms power to con
troll all public grounds.
Code, sections Isl and 755.
And the conditions which render 1t
reasonable and proper to prohibit the
planting of hitching posts in an orna.
| mental public park are manifestly
even more persuasive than those call
ing for such action with reference to
a public street Moreover, hitching
posts planted upon the line OF the
| street contemplate the standing OF
| teams and vehicles wholly within the
public way and these posts being con
| stantly in use have the effect to ex'
| clude public travel from the public
street-a strip some twenty to thirty
feet wide-during all the business
| hours of the day. Surely II this is
not a matter concerning which the
| city may exercise a power of regula
| ton and control the authority given
! by the statutes is restricted within
very narrow limits. TO say nothing
of this encroachment upon or incun
| brance of the street itself, we see nc
reason to deny the city the authority
to remove the posts and the Gordon
| of horses which surround the PARK
as being for the benefit and attractive
ness of the place as public pleasure
ground The power and jurisdiction OF
| the board of park commissioners IS
! not involved in this controversy FOL
as above noted the order for the re-
moval of the posts was made before
| the board was called into. existence
| and at time when the jurisdiction oil
the council was beyond question. In
deed were the board here asserting
any authority as opposed to the city
| council it would be difficult to fino
any argument for the proposition that
| it could authorize the maintenance o.
standing invitation to the drivers
| and owners of horses to obstruct the
streets which surround the square as
against the order of the council pro
hibiting such obstruction.
The radical weakness of the appel
lant's case is quite strikingiy revealed
| in their closing argument where they
especially object to that part of the
councils order which not only di
reefs the removal of the racks around
the public square, but establishes a
new location for such convenience
lat Market Place and the city Fire
| Department" This counsel say, wa
done in order to put the hitching place
near the property and business Of
other business men who had come tc
| the city at the eleventh hour and
wanted to reap where they had not
sown." The court must beg leave to
assume that it is not yet near eleven
| O'Clock in the history of Oskaloosa
and that the prosperity and growth
by which it has expanded beyond the
immediate surroundings of the orig
inal public square until the regions
about Market Place and the City Fire
Department lift up their heads in ri
valry with their elder neighbors viii
long continue to characterize tina
thriving municipality. In such event
the time is doubtless not far distant
when the course of municipal i'm
provements will compel the hitch
racks to remove to some remoter 10
cation and both parties to this cOntrO
| versy may then cordially unite in de
nouncing the council for it's favor
itism to a still later generation OF
business men. Interpreted in the
light of the argument here referred
to appellants demand is that the
public street should be subjected tc
| their private use in manner to give
them an alleged advantage over prop
erty owners and business men located
in other portions of the city. Doubt
less there are oIner parties promoting
the establishment of another hitChing
place on the theory that it will enure
to their own benefit. If these cOnsld
erations are allowed to control or in
fluence the official acts of the counci
1t will mean a sparalyZation of al
municipal improvements for, general
Il speaking, no public work can be un
dertaken which is not of more advant
age to some property than it is to
others.
A claim is made in argument that
the title to the public square Is still
in the county commissioners who
acted as a medium through which the
dedication of the land as a town pla
was effected. This suggestion can
hardly be made with much confidence
The filing of the tract containing the
tract marked Public Square" fol
lowed by its occupation, use and i'm
proyement as park constituted a
complete dedication and the title o.
the city thereto is as complete as is
it's title to the streets designated upon
the same plat The title never vested
in the commissioners, but in the pub
lie and when the community incorporat
ed itself the title Injured to the mum
cipality in trust for public use.
Scott VS.. Des Moines, GA Iowa 752.
i Liver:nore VS.. Maquoketa, 35 Iowa
| 1858.
i or the many cases cited in the APP
pellant's brief we find none which Is
| in anv manner inconsistent with ON