§ 1005. Same subject; accumulation of rubbish. Negligence may arise in a maintenance of streets through a failure to remove accumulations of rubbish,283 whether caused by natural or artificial means,234 by the corporation itself or private persons.2 235 § 1006. Ice and snow. The duty to exercise reasonable care in keeing highways in a fit condition for travel applies also to accumulations of ice and snow or its removal from the surface when of such a character 236 Pueschell v. Kansas City Wire & Iron Works, 79 Mo. App. 459. But it is not necessary to keep the portion of the street so used for building material in a proper condition for public travel or a playground for children. Rommeney v. City of New York, 49 App. Div. 64, 63 N. Y. Supp. 186; Koch v. City of Williamsport, 195 Pa. 488, 46 Atl. 67; Hundhausen v. Bond, 36 Wis. 29. But see Raymond v. Keseberg, 84 Wis. 302, 54 N. W. 612, 19 L. R. A. 643. 233 Hazzard v. City of Council Bluffs, 79 Iowa, 106, 44 N. W. 219; Hall v. City of Cadillac, 114 Mich. 99; Heckman v. Evenson, 7 N. D. 173; Frazier v. Borough of Butler, 172 Pa. 407, 33 Atl. 691; Archer v. Town of Johnson City (Tenn.) 64 S. W. 474; City of El Paso v. Dolan (Tex. Civ. App.) 25 S. W. 669; City of Galveston v. Reagan (Tex. Civ. App.) 43 S. W. 48. 234 Hazard v. City of Council Bluffs, 87 Iowa, 51, 53 N. W. 1083; City of Springfield v. Spence, 39 Ohio St. 665. 235 Ray v. City of St. Paul, 40 Minn. 458, 42 N. W. 297; Badgley v. City of St. Louis, 149 Mo. 122, 50 S. W. 817. 236 City of Providence v. Clapp, 17 How. (U. S.) 161; Congdon v. City of Norwich, 37 Conn. 414. Question for jury. Seeley v. Town of Litchfield, 49 Conn. 134. In respect to nature of duty. Savage v. City of Bangor, 40 Me. 176; Rogers v. Inhabitants of Newport, 62 Me. 101; Ellis v. City of Lewiston, 89 Me. 60, 35 Atl. 1016; Fortin v. Inhabitants of Easthampton, 145 Mass. 196, 13 N. E. 599; Harris v. Inhabitants of Newbury, 128 Mass. 321; Murphy v. City of Worcester, 159 Mass. 546, 34 N. E. 1080; Spaulding v. Town of Beverly, 167 Mass. 149, 45 N. E. 1; Nebraska City v. Rathbone, 20 Neb. 288; City of Lincoln v. Janesch, 63 Neb. 707, 89 N. W. 280. The duty of keeping sidewalks free from ice and snow may be imposed by statute upon abutting owners. Smith v. City of Brooklyn, 36 Hun (N. Y.) 224; Wyman v. City of Philadelphia, 175 Pa. 117; Templeton v. Warriorsmark Tp., 200 Pa. 165, 49 Atl. 950; Barton v. Town of Montpelier, 30 Vt. 650; McCabe v. Town of Hammond, 34 Wis. 590. Question for jury. Fife v. City of Oshkosh, 89 Wis. 540, 62 N. W. 541; Hyer v. City of Janesville, 101 Wis. 371, 77 N. W. 729. Reasonable care does not require a walk to be scraped. But see McKellar v. City as to cause a dangerous and slippery condition. 237 This duty, it will be readily seen, varies with climatic conditions 238 and the financial ability of the corporation to remove frequent or constant falls of snow or sleet.25 239 The existence of the duty is also dependent upon the character of the accumulation whether natural or artificial. In northern latitudes frequent falls of snow or sleet may cause obstructions or a dangerous condition even when left of Detroit, 57 Mich. 158; Hutchinson v. City of Ypslanti, 103 Mich. 12, 61 N. W. 279. See, also, § 1021, post. 237 Smith v. City of Chicago, 38 Fed. 388; Gaylord v. City of New Britain, 58 Conn. 398, 20 Atl. 365; City of Hartford v. Talcott, 48 Conn 525; Wood v. Borough of Stafford Springs, 74 Conn. 437, 51 Atl. 129; Cloughessey v. City of Waterbury, 51 Conn. 405; City of Virginia v. Plummer, 65 Ill. App. 419; Cosner v. City of Centerville, 90 Iowa, 33; Hodges v. City of Waterloo, 109 Iowa, 444, 80 N. W. 523; Newton v. City of Worcester, 174 Mass. 181; Rolf v. City of Greenville, 102 Mich. 544, 61 N. W. 3; Wesley v. City of Detroit, 117 Mich. 658; Waltemeyer v. Kansas City, 71 Mo. App. 354; Taylor v. City of Yonkers, 105 N. Y. 202, 11 N. E. 642; Gardner v. Wasco County, 37 Or. 392, 61 Pac. 834, 62 Pac. 753. Question for jury. Decker v. City of Scranton, 151 Pa. 241, 25 Atl. 36; Scoville v. Salt Lake City, 11 Utah, 60, 39 Pac. 481; Ziegler v. City of Spokane, 25 Wash. 439, 65 Pac. 752; Paulson v. Town of Pelican, 79 Wis. 445, 48 N. W. 715; Byington v. City of Merrill, 112 Wis. 211, 88 N. W. 26. No liability under Rev. St. 1898, § 1339 as amended by Laws 1899, c. 305, unless an accumulation of ice and snow has existed for three weeks before the damage occurred. Koch v. City of Ashland, 88 Wis. 603, 60 N. W. 990. But see Henkes v. City of Minneapolis, 42 Minn. 530, 44 N. W. 1026; Levasseur v. Village of Haverstraw, 63 Hun, 627, 18 N. Y. Supp. 237; Chase v. City of Cleveland, 44 Ohio St. 505; Borough of Mauch Chunk v. Kline, 100 Pa. 119. See, also, § 1021, post. 238 McDonald v. City of Toledo, 63 Fed. 60; D'Estimonville v. City of Montreal, 18 Rap. Jud. Que. C. S. 470; Burr v. Town of Plymouth, 48 Conn. 460; Spillane v. City of Fitchburg, 177 Mass. 87, 58 N. E. 176; O'Hara v. City of Brooklyn, 57 App. Div. 176, 68 N. Y. Supp. 210; Berger v. City of New York, 65 App. Div. 394, 73 N. Y. Supp. 74; Dorn v. Town of Oyster Bay, 158 N. Y. 731, 53 N. E. 1124; Scoville v. Salt Lake City, 11 Utah, 60, 39 Pac. 481; City of Lynchburg v. Wallace, 95 Va. 640, 29 S. E. 675. 239 Rooney v. Randolph, 128 Mass. 580; Hayes v. City of Cambridge, 136 Mass. 402; Battersby v. New York (N. Y.) 7 Daly, 16; Crawford v. City of New York, 86 App. Div. 107, 74 N. Y. Supp. 261; Spear v. Town of Lowell, 47 Vt. 692. But see Lindsay v. City of Des Moines, 68 Iowa, 368. Whether a city has greater or less area of sidewalks is immaterial on the question of its liability for want of proper care in keeping them free from snow and ice. as naturally deposited. No liability arises under such circumstances.240 On the other hand, where the accumulations of ice and snow are made by artificial means, or caused by defective construction of the way, a liability may arise if there is negli. gence on the part of the authorities in using the means at their disposal to remove them.241 The duty of keeping sidewalks free 240 City of Chicago v. Richardson, 75 Ill. App. 198; Smyth v. City of Bangor, 712 Me. 249; Mason v. City of Boston, 96 Mass. 508; McGuinness v. City of Worcester, 169 Mass. 272, 35 N. E. 1068; Newton v. City of Worcester, 169 Mass. 516, 48 N. E. 274; Kannenberg v. City of Alpena, 96 Mich. 53, 55 N. W. 614; Stanke v. City of St. Paul, 71 Minn. 51, 73 N. W. 629; Harrington v. City of Buffalo, 50 Hun, 601, 2 N. Y. Supp. 333; Kaveny v. City of Troy, 108 N. Y. 571, 15 N. E. 726. City liable for slippery condition of the sidewalk made so by smooth ice of recent formation. Kleng v. City of Buffalo, 72 Hun, 541, 25 N. Y. Supp. 445; Peard v. City of Mt. Vernon, 83 Hun, 250, 31 N. Y. Supp. 395, affirmed 158 N. Y. 681, 52 N. E. 1125; Anthony v. Village of Glens Falls, 4 App. Div. 218, 38 N. Y. Supp. 536; Staley v. City of New York, 37 App. Div. 598, 56 N. Y. Supp. 237; Taylor v. City of Yonkers, 105 N. Y. 202; Kleng v. City of Buffalo, 156 N. Y. 700, 51 N. E. 1091, affirming 72 Hun, 541, 25 N. Y. Supp. 445; Cook v. City of Milwaukee, 24 Wis. 270; Koepke v. City of Milwaukee, 112 Wis. 475, 88 N. W. 238; City of De Pere v. Hibbard, 104 Wis. 666, 80 N. W. 933; Dapper v. City of Milwaukee, 107 Wis. 88, 82 N. W. 725. See, also, § 1021, post. 241 Town of Cornwall v. Derochie, 24 Can. Sup. Ct. R. 301; City of Boulder v. Niles, 9 Colo. 415, 12 Pac. 632; McQueen v. City of Elkhart, 14 Ind. App. 671, 43 N. E. 460; Huston v. City of Council Bluffs, 101 Iowa, 33, 69 N. W. 1130, 36 L. R. A. 211; Magaha v. City of Hagerstown, 95 Md. 62, 51 Atl. 832; Carville v. Inhabitants of Westford, 163 Mass. 544, 40 N. E. 893; McGowan v. City of Boston, 170 Mass. 384, 49 N. E. 633; Bailey v. City of Cambridge, 174 Mass. 188, 54 N. E. 523; Leahan v. Cochran, 178 Mass. 566, 60 N. E. 382, 53 L. R. A. 891; Davis v. Rich, 180 Mass. 235, 62 N. E. 375; Hughes v. City of Lawrence, 160 Mass. 474, 36 N. E. 485; Reedy v. St. Louis Brewing Ass'n, 161 Mo. 523, 61 S. W. 859, 53 L. A. R. 805; Foxworthy v. City of Hastings, 25 Neb. 133, 41 N. W. 132; Corbett v. City of Troy, 25 N. Y. State Rep. 520, 6 N. Y. Supp. 381; Conklin v. City of Elmira, 11 App. Div. 402, 42 N. Y. Supp, 518; Mosey v. City of Troy, 61 Barb. (N. Y.) 580; Pomfrey v. Village of Saratoga Springs, 104 N. Y. 459; Gillrie v. City of Lockport, 122 N. Y. 403, 25 N. E. 357; Tremblay v. Harmony Mills, 171 N. Y. 598, 61 N. E. 501, affirming 57 App. Div. 630, 68 N. Y. Supp. 1150; Miller v. City of Bradford, 186 Pa. 164, 40 Atl. 409; Hampson v. Taylor, 15 R. I. 83; McCloskey v. Moies, 19 R. I. 297, 33 Atl. 225; Scoville v. Salt Lake City, 11 Utah, 60, 39 Pac. 481; Hill v. City of Fond du Lac, 56 Wis. 242. But see Gavett v. City of Jackson, 109 Mich. 408, 67 N. W. 517, 32 from snow may be imposed by statute or ordinance upon the abutting owner.242 § 1007. Same subject; buildings with their adjuncts and projections. Public highways are established and should be maintained for purposes of ordinary travel and not as a location for buildings erected either by the public authorities or by private persons.243 The construction, therefore, of a building or any portion of it 244 or any of its adjuncts in a public way in such a manner as to interfere with the proper use of the highway at that place will be regarded as an illegal obstruction. The duty is imposed upon the public authorities to cause it to be removed and if there is a failure in the proper performance of this duty resulting in injury, damages can be recovered. The term "adjuncts and projections' include ordinarily projecting portions of a building or objects attached to it, and supported entirely from the building or partly from the street, such as signs,245 awnings 246 and the like.247 And L. R. A. 861; Chamberlain v. City of 242 Inhabitants of Easthampton v. Hill, 162 Mass. 302, 38 N. E. 502; Taylor v. Lake Shore & M. S. R. Co., 45 Mich. 74; City of St. Louis v. Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co., 107 Mo. 92, 17 S. W. 637; Norton v. City of St. Louis, 97 Mo. 537, 11 S. W. 242; State v. Jackman, 69 N. H. 318, 41 Atl. 347, 42 L. R. A. 438; City of Lincoln v. Janesch, 63 Neb. 707, 89 N. W. 280, 56 L. R. A. 762; Pomfrey V. Village of Saratoga Springs, 104 N. Y. 459, 11 N. E. 43; Taylor v. City of Yonkers, 105 N. Y. 202, 11 N. E. 642; Heeney v. Sprague, 11 R. I. 456; Calder v. City of Walla Walla, 6 Wash. 377, 33 Pac. 1054. But see City of Chicago v. O'Brien, 111 Ill. 532; State v. Jackman, 69 N. H. 318, 41 Atl. 347, 42 L. R. A. 438. Where such an ordinance was held valid not being an unreasonable exercise of the police power. 243 But see Pennsylvania Co. v. City of Chicago, 181 Ill. 289, 54 N. E. 825, 53 L. R. A. 223. 244 Kies v. City of Erie, 169 Pa. 598, 32 Atl. 621. 245 Gray v. City of Emporia, 43 Kan. 704, 23 Pac. 944; Champlin v. Village of Penn Yan, 34 Hun (N. Y.) 33. But see Hewison v. City of New Haven, 34 Conn. 136; Jones v. City of Boston, 104 Mass. 75; Taylor v. Peckham, 8 R. I. 349. 246 Larson v. City of Grand Forks, 3 Dak. 307; Day v. Inhabitants of Milford, 87 Mass. (5 Allen) 98; Drake v. City of Lowell, 54 Mass. (13 Metc.) 292; Bohen v. City of Waseca, 32 Minn. 176; Hume v. City of New York, 47 N. Y. 639; Id., 74 N. Y. 264; Bieling v. City of Brooklyn, 120 N. Y. 98, 24 N. E. 389. 247 Grove v. City of Ft. Wayne, 45 the rule also supplies to structures in a dangerous condition on or near the street.248 § 1008. Poles, wires and similar objects as obstructions. The use of public highways by telegraph, telephone or electric light wires and poles is undoubtedly contrary to the primary purpose for which public highways are established and maintained and unless they are erected and operated under proper and lawful authority are to be regarded as nuisances and obstructions of such a character as to create, unless remedied, a violation of the duty imposed upon public corporations in respect to the maintenance of their highways.249 Where, however, their use is duly authorized, they then become defects only when by reason of their location 250 or of their condition 251 they constitute a menace to the safety of travelers. § 1009. Excavations or depressions. The duty is imperative in respect to the protection of travelers from excavations made in the street either by the corporation itself in its repair, the making of improvements, or by others in the performance of some lawful purpose. The dangerous character of excavations is not disputed and if the public are not either Ind. 429; Borough of Norristown v. 248 City of Chicago v. Major, 18 Ill. 349. Defective city water tank. City of Chicago v. Smith, 95 Ill. App. 335. Defective arch across street. Langan v. City of Atchison, 35 Kan. 318, 11 Pac. 38. Bill board near sidewalk. Nesbitt v. City of Greenville, 69 Miss. 22, 10 So. 452; Grogan v. Broadway Foundry Co., 87 Mo. 321. But see Taylor v. Peckham, 8 R. I. 349. 249 Young v. Inhabitants of Yarmouth, 75 Mass. (9 Gray) 386; Kennedy v. City of Lansing, 99 Mich. 518, 58 N. W. 70; Twist v. City of Rochester, 165 N. Y. 619, 59 N. E. 1131, affirming 37 App. Div. 307, 55 N. Y. Supp. 850. No liability for death caused by falling wire negligently strung by the city. See § 833, ante. 250 Atkinson v. City of Chatham, 26 Ont. App. 521; Hayes v. Inhabitants of Hyde Park, 153 Mass. 514, 27 N. E. 522, 12 L. R. A. 249; Watts v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 100 Va. 45, 40 S. E. 107; Roberts v. Wisconsin Tel. Co., 77 Wis. 589, 46 N. W. 800. 251 District of Columbia v. Dempsey, 13 App. D. C. 533; City of Sterling v. Schiffmacher, 47 Ill. App. 141; City of Decatur v. Hamilton, 89 Ill. App. 561; Burns v. City of Emporia, 63 Kan. 285, 65 Pac. 260; Bourget v. City of Cambridge, 159 Mass. 388, 34 N. E. 455; Neuert v. City of Boston, 120 Mass. 338; |