Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1916-09-23
CITY WINS FIGHT TO CONDEMN
PROPERTY IN "I4ARDSCRABBLE E
Icontinued From First PagcJ

before us for consideration. Many
of them relate to the form of the re-
port of the viewers. alleging that 1t
/ Is not in accordance with the direc-
tions of the Act of June %, 1911.
Viewers Fulfilled Duties
We are of opinion that the report
sufficiently complies with the Act OF
! Assembly. 1t shows the names of the
persons who are found by the view
| ers to have sustained damages and
| the names of the persons who are
benefited. and the amounts due to
or payable by these parties respect
lively are set out. Accompanying the
report of the viewers is a plan, not
actually attached thereto, but which
can be attached whenever desired.
This answers the statutory purpose
and we are of opinion that the eX-
ception that the plan is not attached
to the report ought not to be sustain
ed. The report and the plan returned
together by the viewers clearly in
dicate the location of the improve
ment and the names of all the parties
affected thereby and we overrule all
exceptions to the form of the report.
There are numerous other exceptions
which we will consider.
The Exceptions
zone exception alleges that the or
authorize the opening of Front street;
that the City Solicitor is not empow-
cred to direct the opening of streets,
and that the ordinance is defective be-
cause it does not designate the city
official plan to which it refers, nor
state where it is kept on file. The
Act of January 2. 1871, p. l.. 1856.
approves, ratities and confirms the
plan or draft of the city prepared by
the commissioners, and directs that
copy thereof be place of record in
the offices of the Prothonotary and
the Recorder of Deeds of Dauphin
county and also among the records of
the common council of the city. This
plan designates for public use as a
highway Front street between the
points named in the ordinance and
extending from the eastern line of
said street to low watermark of the
river as above stated. This, together
with the subsequent plan adopted by
the city, October Is, 1874, constitutes
the official plan of the city of Harris
burg. 1t could be found at all times
in the office of the council, and as
already stated, there can be no sue
cessful dispute as to the location of
Front street upon the official map of
the city. 1t was within the power of
council to require the opening of said
street and designate an official to take
the necessary proceedings to have the
street officially opened.
The Law of Fixing Cost
The law provides the manner in
which the cost of the improvement
shall be paid and by whom paid and
1t was unnecessary to set this out
in the ordinance. We are of opinion
that the ordinance in question is valid
and that it sufficiently authorizes the
opening of the street.
THE objection that the appoint
ment of viewers was premature and
Illegal because the petition does not
allege any attempt to agree with the
property owners cannot be sustain ed.
The Act of June 81, 1913. in Section
of Article XIV. permits the appoint
ment of viewers where the parties
have not agreed upon the amount of
damages claimed, and the petition in
this case contains this distinct aver
ment. The testimony taken before the
viewers and returned with their re-
port indicates that there was cores
pondence between the several prop
erty owners and the City Solicitor in
regard TO the value of the land. Sec
ton of the Act of June 81, 1913,
expressly auth orizes the viewers to de-
termine the amount of damages as
also the amount of benefits caused
necessary to refer to this in the ordin-
ance or in the decree Of court ap-
pointing the viewers.
The Viewers Report
''It is excepted that the report of
the viewers is contradictory and void
because it state that "All the abutting
property is peculiarly benefited by the
Improvement in the judgment of the
~ HfaTv re, l.,N
hts against the owners of property
on the western side of Front street.
We do not regard the report as con-
Trajectory on this subject. They find
as fact that all abutting property
is benefited and then proceed to assess
Dement'S against certain properties.
which are designated by the name of
the owner This is practically a find
ing of fact that no properties other
than those designated have sustained
benefits on account of which a contri-
button is to be made to the improve
ment. The viewers have properly
concluded that the only abutting
property is on the eastern side of the
street as directed to be opened. All
property west of the line is taken for
the improvement.
The illegal Contention
ut is further contended that the
report is illegal and void because
the note thereto does not state the
reason for not allowing damages for
buildings erected after January 9.
1871. The viewers doubtless prop
erly took official notice of the Act of
January 2, 1871. which contains in it
the provisions hereinbefore referred
to, and we may assume that the rea-
son for not allowing damages for
these improvements was because of
the prohibition contained in the Act
of Assembly.
1T is further suggested that there
are several Acts of Assembly approy-
ed January 2, 1871, and that it is
uncertain which of the Acts are re-
ferred to by the viewers. We do not
think there is any uncertainty uuon
this subject. While there may have
been different Acts of Assembly an
proved upon that date, there is only
one Act OF that date relating to the
city of Harrisburg and the Inference
is quite permissible that it acted be-
cause of the provisions which they
round contained in this statute.
The Assessment Phrase
"One of the exceptants owning five
adjoining properties complains that
a separate assessment of benefits was
not made against each property and
that but a single assessment cover
ing the frontage of the whole five
was made by the viewers. We can
see no objection to ascertaininP the
Dement'S in this way. They were fixed
by the foot front and the total front
- NJ