Los Angeles herald., 1910-10-05
MUST REMOVE
GARBAGE STATION
ReIoading of City Refuse Perma-
nentIy Forbidden on Macy
and Anderson SITS. Lot
PUBLIC HEALTH is MENACED
Judge Mccormick Decides for the
Plaintiffs in Case of Alder
mans Against Alexander
PUBLIC HEALTH is MENACED

A perpetual injunction against the
use of the lot at Macy and Anderson
streets as a garbage reloading station
was issued yesterday by Judge Nc
Cormick of the superior court in the
case of L. r. and e. Alderman against
Charles A. Alexander.
Judge Mccormick finds that the re-
loading station maintained by Alexan-
der Is menace to health, as there are
1000 persons living in a radius of 1000
feet Of the place and that they are
greatly annoyed by the noxious odors
and flies which emanate and are bred
at the station. He says:
There has been much expert testi-
mony taken in the case at bar, in
addition to the testimony of wit
nesses living in the vicinity of said
garbage reloading station, and all of
the evidence clearly shows that the
maintenance of said garbage reload
ing station at said place constitutes
not only serious annoyance to the
same in peaceful enjoyment of their
property and homes, but that the
same Is extremely hazardous and
dangerous to health and safety of all
of such persons.
CASES OF SICKNESS
"The evidence clearly shows that
there have been a number Of cases of
sickness in the vicinity of the garbage
reloading station since the same was
established, which have been caused.
1 believe the evidence shows, by said
garbage reloading station. 1t has also
been shown that one school was
forced to close it's doors because the
children who were pupils therein be-
came sick, and 1 believe there can be
no doubt but what the sickness of these
children was caused by the odors and
stenches coming from the garbage re-
loading station.
II can, of course, appreciate the
necessity in a city of the size of the
city of Los Angeles of promptly and
diligently disposing OF the garbage
which necessarily accumulates within
the city each day, and also appre-
ciate that it's location at any point
near which people are compelled to live
would constitute a nuisance; but can
not agree with the contention In the
case at bar that by reason of the neces-
sity in disposing Of the garbage in this
city, the inconvenience which these
plaintiffs and the other residents of
said community are suffering Is not
sufficient in view of the public neces-
sity and welfare to entitle them to the
relief sought herein, for the evidence in
the case clearly shows that there are
other points where the garbage OF the
city of Los Angeles could be practical
ly reloaded and disposed of without
interfering with the health, safety or
comfort of any person.
Indeed the evidence in the case
shows that there is point only a few
miles distant from the present garbage
reloading station where all of the gar
bage of the city of Los Angeles could
be reloaded and probably disposed of
by incineration or some other method
of final reduction without harassing
and annoying persons from the enjoy
ment of their homes and property
rights and without jeopardizing and
endangering the health and safety Of
any person.
my conclusions, therefore, in this
matter are that there is neither safety,
necessity nor justice In subjecting
these plaintiffs and the other persons
living near the present garbage reload
ing station to the annoyance, injury,
discomfort and danger which are being
occasioned them by reason of the MAIN
tenance of said garbage reloading sta
tion at its present location.
Neither am I able from the evil
dence in this case to say that these
dangers can be removed or remedied to
any considerable extent by any change
or alteration of the present garbage
reloading station at said point, but 1
believe, on the contrary, that the
nuisance is one of such magnitude and
danger that the health, safety and COM
fort of the plaintiffs herein, and of all
the persons living near said garbage
reloading station, can be safeguarded
only by the immediate removal of said
garbage reloading station"