The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1913-09-25

@<NNNNN&GAAANNNNNS@lzzz
that the transmission line was of the
suspension insulator type" and that
known to electrical science. and at
fords complete protection and safe
guard from accident and injury.
The Legal Questions.
AS to the contention Of the petitioners
that the railroad company had no
right to make contract with a COM
there Is no violation OF the State act
concerning corporations. which pro-
hibits railroads from selling, merging
or leasing competing lines. Such u
narrow construction, Judge PrentiS
says. would prevent ordinary traffic
agreements between railroads. or the
erection of "a union station or joint use
of certain facilities. The manifest pur-
was to preserve substantial competi-
ton, and Ii was never intended to pre-
vent ordinary business contracts be-
tween railroad companies beneficial
alike to the contracting parties and the
public. Nor does Judge Prentis agree
with the contention that the statute
which permits n railorad company to
maintain along it's line Il telephone or
telegraph line for its own use, and that
of tho public. forbids by implication
the operation OF such Il transmission
line as is complained OF. Such use. 1t
| is held, is not necessarily Inconsistent
with the ordinary use by the railway
company OF its right OF way.
! The suggestion that it Is necessary
to secure permission from the Board
| OF Supervisors for such wires to cross
public highways is also held by Judge
/ Prentis to be untenable, ON the con-
trary the act expressly provides TINT
public service corporations may cross
county roads under certain specified
conditions.
! Apprehension Unfounded.
| Having disposed of the legal obJec-
! a. Il tts1,
J then discusses the facts as brought out
III the evidence, mainly of technical
character. AS to the dangers alleged,
/ While the apprehensions of the pc
ttioners III tho present state or know
Ledge or Lack OF M,tn p ret
founded in fact. 1t appears that the
structcd. and that every known precau
ton has been. taken to avoid danger
to the public"
The evidence goes in detail into the
safety devices provided and the auto
matte devices for cutting off current
In event of the breaking Of any wires
of the towers. After reciting these
precautions in detail. the opinion says:
the are tTp If ir ON
dangers alleged by the petitioners in
fact exists. The owners OF telephone
power transmission lines are satisfied
with the constructions their service is
now satisfactorily operated. and they
do not anticipate any interruption.
Not Dangerous Unless Climbed.
From consideration of all the tes-
timony, we are convinced that the only
would be encountered in case one
climbed to the top Of one Of the towers
and touched one of the high powered
completed the circuit and caused the
current of electricity TO pass through
touchins Of these ,' towers br ether men
or animals is not dangerous under nor
NAL conditions Even under abnormal
conditions. the electricity would go
through the tower by the most direct
pathway which offered the least resist
areS 5Ne Rr0%nn through the
body OF the person touching the tow
err"
voltage are in operation along railroad
lines, and even along streets OF cities
the commission concludes:
For the reasons indicated. we think
the petitioners have failed TO establish
the allegation that the power line is
menace and danger to the public"
Right to MIKE Case.
Judge Prcntis discusses in some de-
tail the contention OF the petitioners
that the Seaboard had no right to
ALLEVIATE for term OF twenty
and that such Il lease was ultra wires
and void, and. therefore, tho commits
sion should require the removal of the
power company'S lines from the right
| or way. Judge Prentis agrees that a
lease for a specific term is beyond the
powers of the Seaboard. but the juris-
| diction OF the commission Is limited TO
the control of public service corpora
| tons In connection with their public
duties. and the commission has au-
thority To condemn such Il lease so
far, an> so far only. as ii interfc.es
with the performance OF such duties.
! 4 for ints 81
cisions, Judge PrcntiS holds that were
the time ever to come when the bust
ness OF the Seaboard required the use
of all of its l00-foot right of way for
additional tracks, sidines, etc, IL would
become the duty of the company to
resume possession Of the leased strip.
and the duty of the commission to re-
quire ii to resume such possession.
Tenants Mt VIII.
The construction OF the power line is
held to be Il great and benehcent en-
! terprisc, likely to prove OF great pub
| lie benefit and the evidence does not
show that the Seaboard is in any way
! impedcd in the due performance OF Its
duties to the public as IL transportation
company. When the company acquired
u 100 foot right OF way, it located for
the present only a single track, though
having space for multiplication of
main tracks and sidings when needed.
With the probable future needs. the
location Of the power company'S line
on the right of way Of the Seaboard,
the opinion says will probably conflict.
and when that conflict arises the power
companys line must be promptly re-
moved from the right OF way OF the
railway company. The power company
must be construed as n tenant. not for
twenty five years. but at Will, liable to
he ousted either by the Seaboard or by
the commission whenever the property
Is needed for public use for which 1t
was condemned.
Comm issioncrs Rhca and WinShcld
concur in the opinion.