serve the highway in as nearly its original condition as possible 818 and exercise the rights granted in such a manner as to least interfere at all times with the use of the highway by the public generally for legitimate purposes.8 819 820 The duty usually rests upon the railroad company occupying a highway in case a change of grade is made to reconstruct its track at its own expense so as to conform to the changed grade.s The performance of this duty in some instances has been held to include not only the reconstruction of the track at the expense of the railroad company but also the cost of raising that portion of the street occupied by tracks of the new grade as lawfully established.$21 E. R. Co., 90 Mich. 646, 51 N. W. 688. Matter of laying ties. Keitel v. St. Louis, C. & W. R. Co., 28 Mo. App. 657; Dubach v. Hannibal & St. J. R. Co., 89 Mo. 483, 1 S. W. 86; Willis v. Erie City Pass. R. Co., 188 Pa. 56, 41 Atl. 307; Town of Jamestown v. Chicago B. & N. R. Co., 69 Wis. 648, 34 N. W. 728; City of Oconto v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co., 44 Wis. 231. 818 St. Louis, A. & T. Ry. Co. v. State, 52 Ark. 51, 11 S. W. 1035; Commonwealth v. City of Frankfort, 92 Ky. 149, 17 S. W. 287; Reed v. City of Camden, 53 N. J. Law, 322; City of Albany v. Watervliet Turnpike & R. Co., 108 N. Y. 14, 15 N. E. 370; Miller v. Lebanon & A. St. R. Co., 186 Pa. 190, 40 Atl. 413. The track of the street railway company may be built to a grade established by municipal authorities and differing from the rest of the grade of the street. Parsons V. State, 26 Tex. App. 192; Brownell v. Troy & B. R. Co., 55 Vt. 218; City of Oshkosh v. Milwaukee & L. W. R. Co., 74 Wis. 534, 43 N. W. 489. 819 Town of Oxanna v. Allen, 90 Ala. 468, 8 So. 79; Finch v. Riverside & A. R. Co., 87 Cal. 597, 25 Pac. 765; Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. City of Quincy, 136 Ill. 489, 27 N. E. 232, reversing 32 Ill. App. 377; Platt v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. (Iowa) 31 N. W. 883; Nichols v. Ann Arbor & Y. St. R. Co., 87 Mich. 361, 49 N. W. 538, 16 L. R. A. 371; City of Albany v. Watervliet Turnpike & R. Co., 45 Hun (N. Y.) 442. A county may be required by ordinance to remove its tracks from the side of the road where they obstruct travel, to the center of the street. Schild v. Central Park, N. & E. R. R. Co., 133 N. Y. 446; Little Miami R. Co. v. Greene County Com'rs, 31 Ohio St. 338; Galveston City R. Co. v. Nolan, 53 Tex. 139; Town of Mason v. Ohio River R. Co., 51 W. Va. 183, 41 S. E. 418. 820 North Chicago City R. Co. v. Town of Lake View, 105 Ill. 184; Indianapolis & C. R. Co. v. State, 37 Ind. 489; City of New Orleans v. New Orleans Traction Co., 48 La. Ann. 567, 19 So. 565; Water Com'rs of Jersey City v. City of Hudson, 13 N. J. Eq. (2 Beasl.) 420; City of Albany v. Watervliet, 108 N. Y. 14; Ashland St. R. Co. v. City of Ashland, 78 Wis. 271. 821 City of Little Rock v. Citizens' St. R. Co., 56 Ark. 28, 19 S. W. 17; West Chicago St. R. Co. v. City of Chicago, 178 Ill. 339, 53 N. E. 112; Borough v. McKeesport v. McKees The principle further obtains that public authorities may disturb the tracks of a company using the highways for the purpose of making proper improvements, the construction of sewers, laying water mains or the like and that any charges or expense caused by these acts to the railroad company in the temporary displacement and replacement must be paid exclusively by the company.822 § 857. The duty to restore and repair. The duty to restore and repair exists independent of any imposed conditions although it may be included as a part of a grant. The highway must, upon the construction of a railroad system, be restored to its original condition as nearly as possible,823 and, in respect to that part occupied by the roadbed, kept in repair.824 This latter duty, it has been held, is a continuing port Pass. R. Co., 158 Pa. 447, 27 Atl. 1006. 822 National Water-works Co. v. City of Kansas, 28 Fed. 921; Kirby v. Citizens' R. Co., 48 Md. 168; Middlesex R. Co. v. Wakefield, 103 Mass. 262; City of Detroit v. Ft. Wayne & E. R. Co., 90 Mich. 646; State v. Corrigan Consol. St. R. Co., 85 Mo. 263; West Philadelphia R. Co. v. City of Philadelphia, 10 Phila. (Pa.) 70. But see Des Moines City R. Co. v. City of Des Moines, 90 Iowa, 770, 58 N. W. 906, 26 L. R. A. 767; McMahon v. Second Ave. R. Co., 75 N. Y. 231. See, also, Clapp v. City of Spokane, 53 Fed. 515, following City of Tacoma v. State, 4 Wash. 64, 29 Pac. 847; Warren v. City of Grand Haven, 30 Mich. 24. This case holds that a street is subject to all the uses ordinarily imposed upon it which the wants or convenience of the people may render necessary or imperative and one of these uses is the construction of sewers under them. $23 Louisiana & N. R. Co. v. Whitley County Ct., 15 Ky. L. R. 734, 24 S. W. 604; Town of Jamestown v. Chicago B. & N. R. Co., 69 Wis. 648, 34 N. W. 728, following Town of Sheboygan v. Sheboygan & F. R. Co., 21 Wis. 675; City of Oshkosh v. Milwaukee & L. W. R. Co., 74 Wis. 531, 42 N. W. 489. See Elliott, R. R. § 1092. 824 Palatka & I. R. R. Co. v. State, 23 Fla. 546; Robbins v. Omnibus R. Co., 32 Cal. 472. Under Act April 2d, 1866 (Stat. 1866, p. 850) horse railways are not required to keep in repair that part of the street running between a double track. State v. Jacksonville St. R. Co., 29 Fla. 590, 10 So. 590; Commonwealth v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 104 Ky. 366, 47 S. W. 258; Groves v. Louisville R. Co., 22 Ky. L. R. 599, 58 S. W. 508; State v. St. Charles St. R. Co., 44 La. Ann. 562; Northern Cent. R. Co. v. City of Baltimore, 46 Md. 425; Mahoney v. Natick & C. St. R. Co., 173 Mass. 587; Ft. Wayne & E. R. Co. v. City of Detroit, 34 Mich. 78; People v. Fort St. & E. R. Co., 41 Mich. 413, 2 N. W. 188; City of Duluth v. Duluth St. R. Co., 60 Minn. one 825 and varies with the condition of the street, and if an unpaved street is subsequently improved or kind of paving changed, the duty to repair is co-extensive with its changed condition.826 The relative rights of the parties are frequently dependent upon the terms of special contracts or franchises which may have been made or granted in respect to the duty to either restore and repair or to improve. Their duties may be 178, 62 N. W. 267; Baumgartner v. City of Mankato, 60 Minn. 244, 62 N. W. 127; City of St. Louis v. St. Louis R. Co., 50 Mo. 94. Relative to the expense of repairing a street between tracks. City of New York v. New York & H. R. Co., 64 Hun (N. Y.) 635; Doyle v. City of New York, 58 App. Div. 588, 69 N. Y. Supp. 120; Village of Mechanicville v. Stillwater & M. St. R. Co., 67 App. Div. 628, 74 N. Y. Supp. 1149; McMahon v. Second Ave. R. Co., 75 N. Y. 231; City of N. Y. v. Second Ave. R. Co., 102 N. Y. 572. Pittsburg & B. Pass. R. Co. v. City of Pittsburg, 80 Pa. 72. The duty to keep in perpetual good repair requires the removal of a deposit of debris from an extraordinary grade. Ehrisman v. East Harrisburg City Pass. R. Co., 150 Pa. 180, 17 L. R. A. 448; City of Philadelphia v. Philadelphia City Pass. R. Co., 177 Pa. 379, 35 Atl. 720; Citizens' St. R. Co. v. Howard, 102 Tenn. 475, 52 S. W. 864; Memphis, P. P. & B. R. Co. v. State, 87 Tenu. 746; Laredo Elec. & R. Co. v. Hamilton, 23 Tex. Civ. App. 480, 56 S. W. 998. 825 Buritt v. City of New Haven, 42 Conn. 174; Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. City of Quincy, 139 Ill. 355, 28 N. E. 1069; Wellcome v. Inhabitants of Leeds, 51 Me. 313; Cooke v. Boston & L. R. Corp., 133 Mass. 185; Little Miami R. Co. v. Greene County Com'rs, 31 Ohio St. 338; Memphis, P. P. & B. R. Co. v. State, 87 Tenn. 746, 11 S. W. 946; Fitts v. Cream City R. Co., 59 Miss. 323. 826 District of Columbia v. Washington & G. R. Co., 12 D. C. (1 Mackey) 361; Parmelee v. City of Chicago, 60 Ill. 267; West Chicago St. R. Co. v. City of Chicago, 178 Ill. 339, 53 N. E. 112; Lincoln St. R. Co. v. City of Lincoln, 61 Neb. 109, 84 N. W. 892; Fielders v. North Jersey St. R. Co.. 67 N. J. Law 76, 50 Atl. 533; Doyle v. City of New York, 58 App. Div. 588, 69 N. Y. Supp. 120. Under a covenant to keep the pavement within its tracks and within three feet on each side in repair with the best waterstone when a change is made in the street paving to waterstone, the obligation of the company is likewise changed to that stone. Village of Mechanicville v. Stillwater & M. St. R. Co., 67 App. Div. 628, 74 N. Y. Supp. 1149, affirming 35 Misc. 513, 71 N. Y. Supp. 1102; City of Columbus v. Columbus St. R. Co., 45 Ohio St. 98, 12 N. E. 651; Borough of Norristown v. Norristown Pass. R. Co., 148 Pa. 87, 23 Atl. 1060. But if the paving is in repair the street railway company cannot be compelled to change it to correspond with the change of paving in the rest of the streets. City of Reading v. Union Traction Co., 24 Pa. Co. Ct. R. 629; Id., 202 correspondingly increased or diminished and not subject to the general rules which usually obtain.827 The duty to restore and repair is one that may be enforced by mandamus.828 § 858. The duty to improve. The duty to repair and restore as indicated in the last section is clearly established by adjudicated cases. The duty to improve a highway depends, according to the authorities, upon the express imposition by statute or its express inclusion in the grant of the privilege or the franchise.829 Unless it is so made an express con Pa. 571, 52 Atl. 106; Borough of McKeesport v. McKeesport Pass. R. Co., 158 Pa. 447, 27 Atl. 1006. 827 State v. Jacksonville St. R. Co., 29 Fla. 590, 10 So. 590; Western Paving & Supply Co. v. Citizens' St. R. Co., 128 Ind. 525, 26 N. E. 188, 10 L. R. A. 770; State v. New Orleans, C. & L. R. Co., 42 La. Ann. 550, 7 So. 606; State v. St. Charles St. R. Co., 44 La. Ann. 562, 10 So. 927; State v. Canal & C. St. R. Co., 44 La. Ann. 526, 10 So. 940; Ft. Wayne & E. St. R. Co. v. City of Detroit, 39 Mich. 513; Brick & Terra Cotta Co. v. Hull, 49 Mo. App. 433; City of Binghamton v. Binghamton & P. D. R. Co., 61 Hun, 479, 16 N. Y. Supp. 225. The enactment of an ordinance requiring the paving of that part of a street occupied by railroad tracks is not presumptive evidence of the necessity for the improvement. City of New York v. New York & H. R. Co., 64 Hun, 635, 19 N. Y. Supp. 67; People v. Coffey, 66 Hun, 160, 21 N. Y. Supp. 34; Sullivan v. Staten Island Elec. R. Co., 50 App. Div. 558, 64 N. Y. Supp. 91; Davidge v. Common Council of Binghampton, 62 App. Div. 525, 71 N. Y. Supp. 282; Borough of McKeesport v. McKeesport Pass. R. Co., 158 Pa. 447, 27 Atl. 1006; Century Digest, vol. 44, cols. 3229 et seq. 828 State v. Jacksonville St. R. Co., 29 Fla. 590; People v. Chicago & A. R. Co., 67 Ill. 118; Cummins v. Evansville & T. H. R. Co., 115 Ind. 417; State v. St. P., M. & M. R. Co., 35 Minn. 131, 28 N. W. 3; Buchholz v. New York, L. E. & W. R. Co., 148 N. Y. 640, 43 N. E. 76; People v. Dutchess & C. R. Co., 58 N. Y. 152; City of Oshkosh v. Milwaukee & L. W. R. Co., 74 Wis. 534, 43 N. W. 489. 829 District of Columbia v. Washington & G. R. Co., 12 D. C. (1 Mackey) 361; Id., 15 D. C. (4 Mackey) 214; City of Atlanta v. Gate City St. R. Co., 80 Ga. 276, 4 S. E. 269; Atlanta Consol. St. R. Co. v. City of Atlanta, 111 Ga. 255, 36 S. E. 667; Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. City of Chicago (Ill.) 27 N. E. 926. A street railroad company is not liable to special assessments for paving the rest of the street where it is required to pave and keep in repair that part which it uses. Billings v. City of Chicago, 167 Ill. 337, 47 N. E. 731. Where a franchise is granted with this condition when a street is subsequently paved, it is not necessary to give special notice to the rail dition for the occupation of a street, a railroad, whether steam or street, is not obliged to pave, for example, that portion of the road company to make it liable for the cost of paving. City of Cedar Rapids v. Cedar Rapids & M. C. R. Co., 108 Iowa, 406, 79 N. W. 125. Under an obligation to pave, a street railroad company cannot be compelled to refloor with oak plank any portion of the bridge over which its tracks pass. City of Council Bluffs v. Omaha & C. B. St. R. & Bridge Co., 114 Iowa, 141, 86 N. W. 222. A provision that a street railway company shall pay abutting property owners for the paving when tracks are laid on a street already paved does not apply to the city as an owner in respect to the paving at street intersections. City of Shreveport v. Shreveport Belt R. Co., 107 La. 785, 32 So. 189; City of Boston v. Union Freight R. Co., 181 Mass. 205, 63 N. E. 412; Ft. St. & E. R. Co. v. Schneider, 15 Mich. 74. A railway occupying city streets under an agreement for a certain portion is exempt from an assessment for the paving of a proportionate part of the remainder. Ft. Wayne & E. R. Co. v. City of Detroit, 34 Mich. 78; City of Detroit v. Detroit City R. Co., 37 Mich. 558; City of St. Louis v. Missouri R. Co., 13 Mo. App. 524; Lincoln St. R. Co. v. City of Lincoln, 61 Neb. 109, 84 N. W. 802; Lake Shore & M. S. R. Co. v. City of Dunkirk, 65 Hun, 494, 20 N. Y. Supp. 596; City of New York v. Second Ave. R. Co., 31 Hun (N. Y.) 241; Weed v. Common Council of City of Binghamton, 26 Misc. 208, 56 N. Y. Supp. 105; Id. 62 App. Div. 525, 71 N. Y. Supp. 282. A city council has no power to ex empt a street railway company from the application of state laws relative to paving certain portions of highways occupied by tracks. Conway v. City of Rochester, 157 N. Y. 33, 51 N. E. 395; City of Philadelphia v. Second & T. Sts. Pass. R. Co., 13 Pa. Co. Ct. R. 580. Cost of paving at street intersections considered. City of Reading v. United Traction Co., 202 Pa. 571, 52 Atl. 106; City of Philadelphia v. Hestonville, M. & F. Pass. R. Co., 203 Pa. 38, 52 Atl. 184. But a city cannot, without notice to the company where it is required by ordinance itself to do the paving and then recover therefor from the company. Borough of West Chester v. West Chester St. R. Co., 203 Pa. 201, 52 Atl. 252; City of Philadelphia v. Ridge Ave. Pass. R. Co., 143 Pa. 444, 22 Atl. 695; City of Philadelphia v. Spring Garden Farmers' Market Co., 161 Pa. 522, 29 Atl. 286. Berks County v. Reading City Pass. R. Co., 167 Pa. 102, 31 Atl. 474, 663. The use of a bridge by a street railway company may be conditioned upon the company's paying the expense of increasing its strength. Gulf City St. R. & Real-Estate Co. v. City of Galveston, 69 Tex. 660, 7 S. W. 520. A city cannot recover for filling, grading and paving a street, from a railroad company under a covenant to keep its roadbed in good repair and to pay all expenses of filling, and paving or otherwise including the street between its tracks when the railroad is not built until after the improvements have been made. |