OCR Text |
Show HIE WM CASES. Tho Fight Between the Common Carrier and Residents of the Eightoonth Ward Renewed. - u A DEPRECIATION OF VALUE 3 o A Property Holder Oito3 Some Startling Facts on the Eifects of the Eleo- trio Current. Q The nilroad cases have pushed t everything else aside for the time being -( in Judge Zane's court and are now m occupying attention to the exclusion of Q everything that calls fur anything more 7a voluminous than a three-line order. W Th'Tc are two independent actions on tho docket each of which involve the H same issues mid attack the defendants ffl ou the same principles. The tint is l that of Thomas Jennings et al vs The jl Salt Lake lfailway company et al and M the second the Dooly Block, a corporation, corpora-tion, et al vs The Rapid Transit company, com-pany, The questions in both being identical the causes were joined. In the first case plaintiffs set forth that the construction of railway tracks on First East street are in the nature of an obstruction, and have a tendency to depreciate the value of property without . being a publ c necessity. In the second action, plaintiffs pray for an injunction, restraining defendants from constructing construct-ing and operating a ruilway track on Second South street. For cause of r.ction they set up that the street is already al-ready occupied by two tracks, and that a third will seriously interfere with tralbc, travel, etc. Defendant in tho last named suit, in answer to plaintiffs, denies that the plaintiffs are or at any time were th owner or owners of said street as lies immediately in front of their property, ami claim that said street and every portion of it is vested in the city of Salt Lake; denies that plaintiffs are entitled to the free and unrestricted use of said street as a means of access to their premises, or are entitled to tho use thereof more than in common with the people of Salt Lake. The defeudant further denies that the railway already constructed on that thoroughfare al-forded al-forded all tne necessary conveniences for rapid transit to any and all parts of the city to persons who might have occasion to travel upon or along said streets by mcaus of street railways, or that the resolution of tho cLy council granting to the defendants the right to construct and operate a railway was nugatory or void. Tho defendant further fur-ther denies that the construction of the road will depreciate the value of plain- ' tiffs property, or bo injurious to its convenient con-venient use or enjoyment. Defendant f"rthers;s Mi;itt j.--tuaall'---'1'"1- and has already contracted for and is reoetving material for the completion and operation of its entire system of trackage; that in the construction of said railway it has already expended $175,000, and has already entered en-tered into contracts for the further construction of said road, which will require a further outlay of $7."i.000 before t he first of January. 1801. Tho further allegation is made that Second South street is 132 feet wido. that the two tracks now thero and the one proposed to be constructed occupy only thirty-six feet of the width of said street, and that ample room will remain on each side of them for traffic. The defendant further alloges that the plaintiffs have not, nor will suffer any especial or peculiar damage by the construction con-struction of the said railway. Wherefore defendant be denied all relief sought and that it be awarded judgment for costs. The evidence in the cases was resumed re-sumed at 10 o'clock this morning, when ' Superintendent Reod went upon the stand and explained the manner in which the electricity was inducted to the machinery of tho ear; tho trolly is suspended on a wire, of which thero are about twenty-nino miles in tho city. The cross arm was adopted by the Salt Lake City Railway company for the reason that side poles, unless "they were extremely high, would alllow too much sag. The accidents thus far havo all emanated from the cross wire. The Salt Lake City Railway company began its operations before the Rapid. Transit company who, continued Superintendent Su-perintendent Reed of tho former company, com-pany, used its wire without consent, lie ordered them off and they got off immediately. If the trolley wire should break at the point in controversy it would fall to the ground, Mr. Brown What would be the effect if it struck a man. Tho witness Don't know, sir; I was never struck. Witness said it was not possible to operate both systems over one track with safety as the danger of collisions was too serious, Tho company could not go up A street as tho grade on that thoroughfare was about !15 per cent and the system is limited to about 15 percent. Four percent is about the average safety grade although 8 per cent is easily handled. Tho company could not go up C street because while tho grade is not very marked at first it does become very heavy before Sixth street is reached. Witness thought there should be a margin of at least two feet between the bodies of the cars to guarantee safety, as people would insist on thrusting their heads out of windows, notwithstanding notwith-standing the danger of being brained nr Fi Iii!iiljl Span wiro work, said the superin-I superin-I teudent, is used almost exclusively ill the larger cities, the exceptions b 'ing where the thoroughfares are especially wide. The line ou First East affords the only connection with that part of the city. Tho locality lo-cality is thickly settled and traflic is heavy. Witness stated that where the cross arm was used it was safe only to have as much space between be-tween the car and tho pole as between tho cars themselves where the span wire is employed. Mr. Brown What are the annual profits of tho road for ruuuing it over this particular block? Objected to. Mr. Brown We desire to show them to be nothing as compared with our losses on the block. The objection was sustained. Mr. Rowe who resides on First South between First E:ist and A streets described des-cribed the architectual features of the iContinueu. to pae 6. THE MM CASES. (Continued from pai;e 1. locality and the condition in which the two railway companies hud left the street. The elevation of the track hud been left from 4 to H inches above the grade of the streets w hich had been tilled with cobble stones, so that it was almost impossible to cross it. Were a oonvpyancH caught in the stretch beyond be-yond Fairle gate where the track rises 3 inches above the grade there would scarcely be any escape from (tenth. Witness was awakened each morning at an untimely hour by the hissing ami buzzing of the cars, while his wife could not ilrivo up the street because there was jot room enough uu the sides, and the center was overhung by too much danger. As to how values had been effected. MV. it owe ti -stiiiou that property had sustained au injury of Til) per cent, or a total dan age to the block of SliM.OiH). ( In his cross-cMiminatiou, Mr. l'owo stated that ho had sie.ied a petition to the city council in behalf of tho Salt Lake City railway, but this he had done out of consideration for those who live above him, and a condition specitiotl by him was that t hero should be one track on the street. A subsequent subse-quent franchise had been awarded the rapid transit company, who began to construct, whereupon witness appealed to tho rnavnr. He also asked Superintendent Superin-tendent Heed to use iron poles, but ho pronounced them dangerous. "A matter," mat-ter," said tho witness, "that 1 knew lo be all bosh, as I had just been to Boston, where they aro used exclusively." exclu-sively." Tito case is still on trial. |