The Waterbury Democrat., 1931-06-03
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1881
Amicus Curiae

Perhaps the most singular court case ever instituted in the history of this state is now being held before Judge Alfred C. Baldwin in the superior court of Hartford. The Attor- ney General of Connecticut has instituted custer proceedings against the Public Utilities Commission for material neglect of duty by failing to order railroad companies to comply with the law of removing one grade crossing annually for every 50 miles of track main tained The action is singular in many re- speets, moro so today than 1t would have been when originally demanded by Professor Albert Levitt the Bedding crusader.
 When Professor Levitt started his famous action the attorney general of this state was Benjamin w. filling of New Britain. Now former federal judge. However, Deputy At torney General Ernest L. Averill is appearing for Attorney General Burroughs just as he was for Mir Aling One of the riginal defend- ants cited in the action is now dead. We refer to the late Charles C. Elwell, who as d mem- bcr of the. Public Utilities Commission, was named by Professor Levitt. Prior to Mir FL wells death he resigned his commissionership and it was filled by Colonel Edwy L. Taylor of New Haven. but the latter does not become involved in the litigation.
 Likewise, when Professor Levitt asked for custer proceedings he was upheld by the law. Few people knew of the existence of law that permitted such action to be taken upon thu application of 100 electors. For that matter only few of us knew there was law requiring the public utilities commission to order railroads to eliminate one grade cross ing annually for every 50 miles of track. The le3l Legislature repealed both these laws. The first one met with some opposition from the democratic party, for it does give the voters chance to manifest it's dlspleasure with the public utilities commission As for the grade elimination law it was better repealed as no railroad company or even the state could hopo to remove 1 8 grade crossings every year. The law does still forbid the con- struction of new crossings.
 Despite the fact that both these laws are now off the statute books the action will be contested as it was brought when they were in force Professor Levitt himself IS appear ing at the table at which sit counsel for the attorney general in the capacity Of amcus ,curiae or friend of the court. We don't think that much will come of the action, although MT Levitt won signal victory Tn having custer proceedings brought. The of flee of the attorney general has not been dis posed kindly towards the Bedding man ever since he started to force republicans to do what they didn't want to do. However, if it can be proved that the Public Utilities Commls sion has shown material neglect of duty in the past the contention of Governor Cross that the commission needed overhauling will be supported.
 In his own way the governor tried to do that by naming Professor Richard Smith of the Yale Law School an acknowledged au thorty on public utilities law, to the com mission The Legislature failed to support his choice and practically forced him to re- name Commissioner Joseph Alsop and replace Mir Elwcll with Colonel Taylor. It certainly would be complete vindicaton of the governors stand to have the court rule the commission negligent. The chances of it do- ing so in this particular case are not very good. However. we have to congratulate Professor Levitt He's done what others tried to do and failed miserably.