Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1918-01-10

&c entertain and act upon his petition.
At the time when the charter of tue
Augusta. Hallowell and Gardiner Rail-
read Company was granted by the Leg
islature there was 70 general law ieidt-
ing to street railways. In 1898 the Leg
islature enacted the first general law.
1t was amended IN 1895. but neither in
the original law nor in the last named
amendment do we find anything which
interferes with the above quoted sec
ton from the railroad charter. In 1897
the LEGISLATURE enacted chapter 249 Of
tie laws Of that year and in section )
appears this clause: Such corpora :
items shall in addition 20 their charter
rights have all the rights and powers
conferred from time TO time by general
laws upon street railroad corporations
and shall be subject to the conditions.
restrictions and limitations thereby i'm
posed" IN 1899 chapter 100 Of the laws
Of that year was enacted and this same
sentence was contained in that chapter
and is now section one of chapter IS Of
the Revised Statutes which is our gen
eral street railway law and before pro-
ceeding to consideration of another sec
tion of the same chapter it is important
that we ascertain the meaning of this
sentence. Previous TO the time when
this section became law Il number of
street railways had been chartered and
had received their grants of power and
were exercising them as q matter of
right. No general law applying to all
street railways, however incorporated.
had been enacted In using the lam
guaoe above quoted did the Legislature
intend that il should apply to some
street railway corporations or did it
intend that it should apply 10 all? No
islature meant by this language il was
intended to be of universal application
and that after its enactment all pro-
visions Of the general street railway
law which constituted a right or power
conferred or condition. restriction or
+ limitation. was To be read into each
charter heretofore granted and con-
stituted repeal of all conflicting pro-
visions in such charter.
We now come 10 what We regard As
distinct change in the method prov i
ded for compelling an alteration in the
location of the tracks Of any street
railway. In 1911 the Legislature ell
acted in chapter So what is row sec
ton u of of chapter $50 which is as
already stated the General street rail
way law. We quote from this section
Upon the petition of ten or more Citi-
ZenS and taxpayers of any city or
town, setting forth that the tracks OF
any street railway being operated in
any CITY or town are located inConven-
iently for the public. the municipal Of
| ticerS may after giving reasonable no.
tice TO all parties interested, hold a
pubic hearing on said petition, AM
may. if in their judgment public con
Nenience, or street Improvement re-
| nuireS it, change said location wlrhir
! the limits Of any street. but not to an
other street, and order the company
| operating the railroad to make the al
terations, and may make such decree
as TO the expense of the same. as be
tween the company and the municipal
ity, as they may deem equitable, sub
| ject to appeal as hereinafter provided
and said alterations shall be made il
! accordance with the directions Of IL,
| municipal officers"
THIS method is surely different from
that provided in the charter of This 1e
/ SpoliueHt, SlNlliS as II does 10 the mum
| cipal officers the first opportunity anl
| the first responsibility with reference
! to a decision as to the necessity of an,
! change Ii also gives to the municipal
! officers an opportunity to appoItion tbt
| expense of such operations between III,
/ railroad ard the municipality, and
! reading of the charter of the respond
| ent leaves us in grave doubt as t,
! whether such expense could he so APP
| portioncd under the charter provisions
| 1t is probable that the LEGISLATURE il
! providing as it did for action bv IN
municipal officers in the town Wher
| the railway was located had IN mnt
the fact that such municipal Dftcer
! would naturally he in more intimate
/ touch with local sentiments and neces
/ stiles than could n board of railroad
I commissioners, and that the local tri
, bunal was the proper one to which
should first be submitted what Nigh
be q contested issue of fact.
But we apprchend we should Z,
farther than TO determine that 4 ner
method was provided in section u TO
I the real question is-dd this new
method supersede the one provided il
the charter of the respondent" Car