The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1912-03-07
EXCESSIVE PENALTY
DENOUNCED In, COURT
Attorney for Western UniJn Holds That Size of
Possible zine Renders Ordinance Invalid.
Pollard Makes Heated Aeply,

Washington, March "a possible
fine OF s23I,ooo for each telegraph pole
IN city district was denounced to-
day before the Suprene Court of the
United States as such an excessive
penalty for questioning the VALIDITY
OF a city ordnance as TO render the
ordinance invalid for that reason
alons.
That was one Of the points argued
by Rush Taggart for the Western
Union Telegraph Company In attack
Ing the validity Of an ordinance OF
Richmond regulating the use OF tho
streets by the telegraph company
The telegraph company claimed
that b. virtue of the Federal Law OF
1866 the company had right to the
use OF the all highways in Virginia.
and that the ordinance was unreason-
able regulation OF this right. Nr. Tag
cart declared that no city could pass
an ordinance giving city engineers
arbitrary. discretion as 70 the kind OF
equipment the companies should use
in the streets. This. he said. was par
tlcularly true as to that portion of
the ordinance requiring the cons;ruc-
ton of underground ducts in a por-
ton OF the city 1t was in connection
with the nght of the company to test
the reasonableness OF this ordinance.
'lt H'i!b' lAdt lIiG @piI4'tbiiN il'iu idii
itself liable to fine OF s23i.ooo
pole or q total Of si,30o.00r.
Makes Heated Repiy.
City Attorney II. H. Pollard made
Il heated reply. in which ne declared
that the courts had reiterated 50 often
that the act of Congress IN 1866 was
only pcrnissive. and conferred no pos
itive rights upon telegraph companies,
that a contrary argument was almost
;iresome. lie declared that the city
of Richmond had not only passed a
reasonable ordinance. but had been
reasonable In enforcing IL.
Mr.. Taggart opened arguments in the
case. briefs in which were lled some
time ago, and the various steps. from
the time the first temporary Injunction
was entered by Judge Waddill up to
and including the period when II was
pending before Judge Nathan Golf.
United States district judge, were fully
discussed by both Mr.. T3ggart and Mr..
Pollard.
Mr.. Taggart opened the arguments a
short time before adjournment. and was
followed by Mr. Pollard, who will con-
tinuc Tomorrow. Mr.. Taggart took
the position mainly that ii the fines
were collected from thirty-two poles
alone upon (which arc strung wires.
the fines would aggregate Sa34.000 per
pole. He said that any such statute as
would enforce such n fire as this null
and void. and should not be above d
TO stand. lie further argued that Judge
Con- should never have dismissed the
original and amended bills for in1unc-
ton: that under its charter the tele-
graph company has such vested rights
that they cannot be taken away and
the enormous burden Incident to plac-
ing wires under ground enforced There
are certain things which the city of
Richmond has n right to do. he main
tanned, and certain things which 1t has
no right to do. and requiring the COM
pnny TO place Its wires underground is
one that it has no right to enforce
Therefore the company asks that the
decision OF Judge Gor Diminishing the
Injunction bills be reversed.
Mr.. Pollard reviewed the effort OF
the city OF Richmond to make and en-
force its statutes and maintained that
when Judge Cot dismissed the bills
of the Western Union asking that the
city of Richmond be enJuined from en- {.
forcing Its ordinances, he did the very