Court Opinion

ID: 9636150
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 14:17:59.350375+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:09:42.631317
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Belt:
I agree with all of the legal principles which the Chief Justice has so ably restated and expounded, but I disagree with the application of one of these principles to the facts of this case.
Evidence of dedications and titles based upon ancient documents or events arising out of antiquity cannot possibly be as strong or clear as would be required in matters arising or titles created in modern times; and we must not lightly strike down rights or public uses which have existed for more than a century: Hostetter v. Commonwealth, 367 Pa. 603, 606, 80 A. 2d 719.
Counsel for the Borough frankly admits that if the Borough can change or destroy this market place it can also change or destroy the church which was built on this same public square and like the market place has been used for more than 200 years. This church and this market place were dedicated by Thomas Penn in 1751; and this dedication and use as a market place were thereafter frequently ratified. The Borough merely contends that there exists today no clear evidence that this square was the “spot” which was dedicated for these purposes.
We are living in exciting and rapidly changing times. We rode frofn the horse and buggy age to the automobile age and then flew too rapidly to the airplane age and the atomic age. The tremendous changes which have occurred and are still daily occurring have necessarily produced uncertainty, unrest and confusion — not only in the minds of men, but in many phases of man’s life. As a consequence, “change” is