Lehigh Coal & Navigation Co. v. Inter-County Street Railway

Citations

• 167 Pa. 126
• 31 A. 477
• 1895 Pa. LEXIS 868

Syllabus

<p>[Marked to be reported.]</p> <p>Street railways — Municipal consent — Boroughs—Burgess—Act of May 23, 1893 — Parlies.</p> <p>An ordinance giving the consent of a borough to the use of a street by a street railway company, was passed ata meeting of the borough council called by the president. The next regular meeting of the council was two weeks afterwards. About one hour and a half before the time of the regular meeting the ordinance was placed in the hands of the burgess, who did not return it at the regular meeting, but on the following day sent in his veto with a statement of his objections. Held, that under the act of May 23, 1893, P. L. 113, the burgess had a reasonable time within which to examine the ordinance; that his veto was in time, and that the ordinance failed.</p> <p>Where the railway company attempted to occupy the street, notwithstanding the veto, the burgess had a standing in equity to restrain the construction of the railway.</p> <p>It may well admit of doubt whether an ordinance adopted at a called meeting is within the meaning of that provision of the act of 1893 that requires a burgess to return an ordinance to which he objects at the next regular meeting of councils. It would seem that an ordinance passed at one regular meeting should be promptly placed in the hands of the burgess who would then have until “ the next regular meeting” for examination and decision. Per Williams, J.</p>