Newspaper Page Text
TOE 8CRA2STON lKIBDJN-i!KlDAr JttOKJSlHli, UJCUKMBEIt 1H, 189?.
The Rutin? 'Wfilcli-S ,,t Text of the Decision vof - Judge; Pherson of Dauphin County )?in j the Effort of 1 Lehigh Valley Interests to Monopolize the Fluid of the Lehigh River's Headwaters The opinion of Judge J. B. McPher on in the equity suits of the Lehigh Coal and Navigation- company., -the Bethlehem South Gas and Water com pany. K. P. Wilbur and Robert H. Sayre and Samuel .Wallace and .others against the Scranton Gas and Water company which was tiled with Pro thonotary Pryor Tuesday is given be low almost in its-entirety.: - These three bills in equity, which were heard and argued together, raise sub stantially the same questions. They grow out of the defendants claim to bring water, from the river Lehigh for domestic and manufacturlng.use in the City of Scranton. ' FINDINGS OF FACT. 1- The !S?& l?f March 16.1 femlant power 4 ExlslngThe powers given by thtiututSJ the company has spent about "vo-millions of dollars upon the Slant -which, Is- now suplying an apr age of 13 W0 000 gallons of water dailj to She city of Scranton and its Immediate neighborhood. Klght millions are used domestic-, and live millions for a. -ufaoturinK purposes. The water is n(". streams nearby one being Stafford Meadow Brook, and the other which is the principal supply, being Kouring Brook. On these streams the defendant has several res ervolrs. In which water is stored for vse as occasion may require. YC: , ,i .imuvht'of 1895 the avail able supply sank s-'o low that the com-J pany turned In alarm .10 oTtlona! source, and f"''d o. carry out a.'plan first considered rt year ago. and build "a iftw reservoir ipon the Uhlgh rlver. In October !. the board of directors 'passed the fol lowing resolution: (Here follows reso luUon appropriating water from Le- h'TLrSdant immediately notified the Lehigh Coal and Navigation con -pany of this resolution, and asked Its consent "that we may take water from the upper waters of the Lehigh near Gouldsboro' station on the U, L. W It. K.. so far as your company is concerned and subject to your right to supply , the canal of the LehlghCoal and Navigation company:" adding, "We propose simply to build storage reservoirs and llll the same In time of freshets and high water, and not inter fere with the ordinary and common flow of water In the stream." Consent was refused, however, and thereupon the defendant proceded to carry out the resolution of Its board. . 3 For this purpose the defendant bought In fee a tract of land ly ng across the head waters of the Lehigh river near tloulilsboro station, and built thereon In the county of Lacka wanna a crib dam crossing the stream. The dam Is two hundred and nfty-nve feet long; the breast is about eight feet high; the spill-way is fifty-seven feet, and the sluice way Is six feet, in breadth. When full, the pool above the dam t overs an area of -sixty-four acres and contains about 61,000,000 gallons of water. At the head of the pool the defendant erected a pumping station and installed therein a pump with a capacity of lO.OUO.OOO gallons per uay. About a mile and a half from this sta tion Is the ridge or divide, about thirty five feet higher than the dam, which separates the water-shed or basin of the pool from the water-shed or basin of Roaring Brook. Connecting with the pump about two miles of Iron pipe was laid, through which the water from the pool can be forced Into the bed of Roaring Brook, mingling thencefor ward with that stream and flowing In to the defendant's reservoirs at Elm hurst and elsewhere, on Its way to be used In the city of Scranton and neigh borhood; The course of the river has not been changed by the defendant; but the stream Hows now through the pool, and passes over the dam or through the sluice-way into its. former, bed. -4. Shortly after work was -begun these .1)1118 in equity were tiled, but there was. no preliminary mterrerence (oy me court, and within a few 'months the clam, pumping-station and plpe-lirte were ready for use. The cost of the whole work was about $:.3,000. In the month of February, 1896, while the river was In freshet above the dam, the gate was closed and the pool was tilled. This was done in about five hours and a half without appreciable effect upon the stream at White Haven or below, and without affecting In the least the interest of any one of these plaintiffs. Since then the defendant .has not ob structed or diminished the How or vol ume of the water. The gate of the dam has been open, and the stream has (low ed without hindrance. No pumping has been done and the water stored re mains in the. pool, -awaiting, the. de-.. cislon of the court upon the pending questions. 5. The defendant's right to build a dam across the stream upon its own land is not denied; but the plaintiffs deny entirely Its right to take any part of the water at any stage, and carry it for use to the city of. Scranton. Their respective interests areasfollows: The Bethlehem South Water company, which supplies the community dwelling in that neighborhood, takes its water from the Lehigh at a point eighty or ninety miles below the dam in con troversy. Messrs. Wilbur and Sayre are among the consumers of the water thus supMled.; and the bill to. No. 6 Januay term Is filed upon the theory that '.these . plaintiffs represent ' the' riparian-' owners, and especially the right of such owners to use the water for domestic purposes. The bill to No. 7 January term, filed by Messrs, Samuel L. Wallace and others, asserts the right to use the water for power; each of these plaintiffs derives his right by lease or other contract from the Lehigh Coal and Navigation company, but as hereafter stated no stress is laid upon this fact and the plaintiffs are regarded as independent rlnnrin n nu-n. ers. The remaining bill Is filed by the uviKpuontf:ompany, whose interest m the subject of dispute requires a state ment in some detail In the sixth finding, after referring to me a oi me rrovince passed in 1771 making the Lehigh a common highway fornavlgatlon, and prohibiting diversion of the water for mills. or nnri.wnru. and erection of dams; also the act of isio cr-. mi), tne act or 1822 (P. L. 21) incorporating Lehich Coal and Navi gation Co., tr-e court says: By virtue of this statute apd supple mentary legislation, the Navigation company Improved the channel of the river and silent a largo sum of money In constructing a slack-water and de scending navigation, building dams at various points along the river from Its mouth at Kaston to the Great Falls at Stoddardsvllle. ,. Its canal and oqulp-i ment ire, how valued on the books of the company ;at about t2.100.000, but a few years ago a further, sum of $1,600,006 was charged, off, and it Jjs probable that much more has been expended. Noth ing seems to have been done by the company above the Falls; at all events, In March, 1836, (P. L. 212) the legisla ture extended the provisions of the act of 1803 above. clted. Via the waters of the Lehigh above" the Tails at Stod dardsvllle" thereby - permitting dams to be erected on'that part of the river; and declaring also, that '"the dams here tofore erected on the headwaters of said stream above the aforesaid falls shall be lawful under the provisions of said act." In the year 1846. (P. L. 134) an act was passed to incorporate The Upper Lehigh Navigation company.. for the purpose of Improving the navigation above the great falls. No evidence was offered that anything" was done In pursuance of this statute; and It Is cited now because the defendant regards it as a fact from which jthocmurt should infer, that In 1840 the legislature did not sup pose Mt had lost its power over the upper waters of- the river, and there fore that the act of 1822 was not Intend ed to transfer absolute dominion over the whole stream to the Coal and Nav igation company. -. , In 1862 a great flood visited the val ley of the Lehigh, aod carried out many of the company's dams. (Here follows a review of the acts of 1863 (P. L. 99) and 1864 (P. L. 633) relating to the rights surrendered by the Lehigh Coal and Navigation company. v; ; ' - In pursuance, lorn-the' powers granted by the acts heretofore cited the com pany maintains a slackwater naviga tion, forty-six. miles long, from Mauch Chunk to the mouth of the river at Kaston, upon which its own boats and boats owned by other persons, to the nu ml T of 309, are engaged In the trans portation of freight, which In each of the years 1894 and 1895 aggregated about 350,000 tons. It has also convey ed to twenty-eight corporations and Individuals,, by, deasavor other form of .contrnot, the -right to use the wjater, n ml the vater-toer.- of the: river for manufacturing and oilier puiposestire-J celvlnjr f romithese contracts a revenue of about $23,900 a yar:-, Eighteen other corporations rhnd Tridfplduuls use the Water for similar purposes without pay ing therefor. The valley is populous, and Its Inhabitants depend on the riv er and its tributaries for their domes tic supply. V. The defendant's dam-Is built within a short distance of'tlW ponds which form the source of the river, and at this point the stream Is usually of small size. The basin, or water-shed, of the dam Is abouc fllteen square miles In area, and In its ordinary stage the vol ume of water ;iloilng through' the pool does not exceed '' 'r gallons a day. The btreum Is rather to be called a brook than a river. In times of fresh ets, however, which occur every year usually late In the winter, or early In the spring the volume is greatly increased, reaching 250,000,000 gallons a clay, or even -more. There are many tributaries-of- the main' river, large and small, both above and below White Haven, all, of which are swollen by floods every year and discharge large quantities of water Into the principal stream. Without further detail, It Is sufficient to find. In general terms, that every year during the season of fresh ets a vast quantity of water Is poured clown the channel of the Lehigh, far In excess of any demand which the plain tiffs, or the total population of the val ley, can possibly Qiafot upon It, either now or, witutB,.any pejlod worth con sidering. s,. ' It Is from this 'water in flood, arrest ed once a year at such a season only, that the defendant has filled and pro poses to fill Its pool, storing the con tents there until an emergency arises. The evidence is ample to Justify the finding that such an act has not been. and will not be, perceptible by any one of the plaintiffs; - and that no injury, even of the most trifling character, has been done or will be done thereby to any Interest which the court is now asked to protect. The ordinary tlow of the stream will not be interfered with; for the dam and pool either are now, or can easily be, so equipped that the exact quantity of water flowing in may be accurately measured and allowed to How out. - 1 ' . . The water-shod of jhe river above White Haven isfthput 300 square "miles in area; and of the whole valley as far as -Huaionr about 1,330 square miles. The Lehigh runs Into the Delaware riv er, and thence i into .Delaware bay: while P.oiulni Brook belongs Jo the Susquehanna svsterti and finds its way at last into Chcsaprake bay. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION-?. The pi incinal question to be consid ered has not yet been decided civ the courts cif Pennsylvania. In the Paci fic slates the subject has been dis cussed, biit I have not been willing to ,rely upon any case from these states as an -authority, because of the different' circumstances which prevail In that rejlon and which have inlluenced the Judicial' and .legislative treatment of the right to Use the water of a stream. Elsewhere there is little help to had. . . The subjects of, controversy have usually been, either a conflict between two rights, both growing cut of riparian ownership; or an Interference (under the right of eminent domain or otherwise) with the normal and ordinary How of the stream. Many of the cases are collectel in the note to Davis, VS. Gctehe.ll, 79-Amer. Decis. C8. But the fwo questions now raised 'are -pertain almost every state of the Union. First; Does mew ri parian' ownership.. juFtlfy 'the owner In diverting a part of the flood-waters of a stream-ami carrying It elsewhere for consumption, so long as the quantity diverted Is ,too small to affect even slightly thel rights of others? And. second: May this diversion and con sumption be authorized under a grant of eminent domain; the stream being navigable, the grantee being a corpora tion supplying water to a city, and the quantity taken being inappreciable by the persons complaining? In this view. It tj enough, to bay, that the litigation taken as a whole brings be fore the court.suhstanttally every kind of right which now exists In the waters of the Lehigh and Is averred to be In danger of Injury at the defendant's hands. ; The Bethlehem South Water company' and the Individuals who Join with It renrcsent a certain class of ri .pftriah owners, and lay esnecial stress upon the -domestic uses to which such owners may lawfully put the waters of a stream. Samuel Wallace and his as-' soclates represent, those who use the river assa source, of power,' and for other objects in the business of manu facturing Finally, the Navigation company standing upon Its legislative title has a certain Interest In the water which does not depend upon riparian owner ship. The extent of.fts right will be examined more fully at a later stage of the discussion -;,. ' - .. . It Is unnecessary to spend time over the first question above stated. The proposition Is, that because the defend ant owns a riparian tract of land It may divert a part of the flood-water of the stream .fqr consumption "In the city. of. Stomton; as long .as. such di version does no. actual. harm to any lower- right., This vlew;of .the law was argued with vigor, ana I do not at tempt to pronounce it unsound. If. however, the argument Is supposed ahw) --to sustain the view that rnere ri parian ownership would justify the defendant In thus diverting any part of the usual and ordinary flow, I feel lit tle hesitation in. declaring this suppo sition at least to be Incorrect. The right of an apper against -a lower ri parian ownership Is so. well settled by numerous authorities, and so thor oughly understood, that elaboration would be superfluous. .-.-ID then the defendant 'was asserting S right to Interfere with the ordinary ow of the stream, and could offer no better Justification - than riparian ow nership, the Injunctions prayed for would be granted: for I agree fully with the plaintiff's argument that where the dispute Is between two- ri parian ' proprietors and turns simply upon the extent of their respective ri parian rights In the ordinary volume of the stream, an Injunction will issue to restrain the upper proprietor from making a non-riparian use of the wat er, even if the evidence does not show any appreciable injury to the owner of the lower tenement. But It the 'defendant's claim Is to take flood-water only, the argument would need consideration; for the ques tion has not yet been decided by any Pennsylvania court. The analogies of this branch of the subject do not favor the defendant's position; for as a gen eral rule riparian ownership has hither to been held to justify riparian use only, and to give no right to -vert the weter for use at a distant point: but how far, if at all, this rule should be modified so as to permit a riparian owner to make a non-rlparlan use of flood-water which no lower owner can possibly miss, from the stream, is a subject upon which I express no opin ion. I. lay aside entirely the defend ant's riparian ownership, because I be lieve the second question above stated to be controlling, and to furnish a suf ficient reason for decision. In this aspect, the defendant's claim depends wholly upon the right of emi nent domain contained in its charter. This consideration removes the discus sion into a different region, and makes Inapplicable almost all the cases cited by both parties. The plaintiffs ask us so to construe the defendant's power "to take water from any stream," as to forbid the taking from any stream unless It flows down some valley within the' basin or water-shed which also contains the city of Scranton. They deny the power of the legislature to authorize a water company to carry water across a divide or ridge sepa rating two water-sheds, because this would divert a part of the stream per manently from one valley to the other. Certainly 'such a diversion would go beyond the .usual power of a riparian proprietor, acting simply upon his right of riparian ownership; but I do not see upon what principle a court may limit the legislative power over this subject. Undeniably the defend ant belongs to the class of corporations which may be clothed with the power of eminent domain. If the state grants this right with out restriction Its- grantee may do whatever the state could do; and nothing limits the power of the state, except perhaps some law of universal, or of Christian, morality. The plain tiffs urge that another limitation Is to be found In the laws of nature, and that flowing water must continue to tlow even where It 1b not needed, un less It can be. taken where the need may be extreme without violating the law of gravitation. I think this argu ment overlooks the object of the power of eminent .domain. This is always to supply some public use; and surely, as between a law of nature and the bene fit of a community, there Is no room to doubt which must go to the wall. I cannot believe that the course of nature Interposes an Immovable bar rier to the legislative will, and 1 do not know what else can prevent tne state from enacting that some part of a stream which has hitherto flowed upon one side of a hiil may now be transported to serve a public use upon the other. I lay no stress, however, on the navigable character of the stream. Whether It Is navigable or not, as a pure question of power, the state might appropriate the whole How for public purposes, making due compensation - therefor; - although doubtless so extreme an exercise of sovereignty would only be supported If the language admitted of no other possible construction. Reasons of policy may exist to restrain the legislature in a given case, but this re straint Is self-imposed. Restriction from without must be found In the course of nature or In the constitution of the state; and I do not And In either the prohibition for which the plaintiffs contend. Speaking generally, the leg islature Is all-powerful, save as re strained by the constitution; it -may certainly take private property for a public use, and this power' extends to the water of a running stream. Upon what principle shall the state be for bidden to cross a small elevation, and pump the water from one side to meet u public use upon the other? The power can only be erctsed upon making payment for property taken or Injured: and the relevant question seems to be; Does the power exist? If it does, I think It can hardly be impor tant to Inquire how distant the stream may be from the place where the wat er is to be used, or how r.-.uny ridges must be surmounted before the point of consumption is reached. If the doc trine contended for by the plaintiffs Is sound, it would be often difficult, and might be impossible, for a large city situated In a small basin to sup ply Its necessities. The case before the court furnishes an example of the diffi culty: for the available sources of sup ply within the Scranton basin have been exhausted, and no more can be had without 'diverting some water course- in part, and pumping it over an eleva tion between the city and the stream. Except from the Lehigh or the Sus quehanna no water is attainable: and while It Is true that the city lies upon -the general water-shed of the Susque hanna. It is also true that a supply from this source must be pumped up a much higher hill than the elevation separating Roaring Brook from the Le high: and that the diversion of water from the Susquehanna -would violate technical rights as distinctly as the diversion now complained of. The legislature has declared In un qualified language that the defendant may "take water from any stream;" and these simple words must be h id to bear the usual and ordinary mean ing. As a result, the power of the defendant extends by positive grant to the stream In dispute, but not to- the whole of the flow. The precise extent of its power Is not now Involved, but there Is -certainly some limit which It cannot pass. Its grant is to take water "from" any stream, and this language implies that some water must be left; how much, need not now be determined. In this controversy, the court Is only, concerned with the question whether a certain quantity of flood-water may be taken and. car ried for consumption Into an adjoining valley. I have already declared my In ability to find a principle by which the right to take and consume. may be limited to the valley of the selected stream; and -It seems pertinent to add. that many instances In the history of the state show that the legislature has not regarded the natural. course of a stream as restricting the power of "emi nent domain. For example, the Union canal mingled the waters f the Schuyl kill and Susquehanna basins; and ev ery canar in the state, even while It Is following the stream, violates ri parian rights by carrying a consider able volume of water past the owners of the banks; and violates these rights as completely and irrevocably as if the water In the canal had been carried over a hill and poured Into stream In the valley beyond. Moreover, It Is a matter of - common- knowledge that many municipalities are supplied from neighboring basins In distinct viola tion of the laws of gravitation and of flowing water. ( , , Without -further discussion of the subject, my conclusion Is that the state gave to the defendant a limited power as to quantity, but an unrestricted lib erty of choice as to stream. In fact, however, there Is a very ,-eal restric tion, namely, that practical and effec tive limitation enforced by distance and cost and the conflicting rights of others, which will always operate ,to confine In actual exercise a grant which 'may be theoretically without bounds. ' The practical limitation above referred to Is evidently regarded by the state as sufficient. It is the only check relied upon In every charter now granted to a water company. - Assuming therefore that the defend ant's charter empowers It to take wat er from the river Lehigh, the further question arises: Has it exercised this power in conflict with the rights of the plaintiffs? Concerning the bill filed by the Beth lehem South Water company, repre senting the riparian right for domestic use, only a word need be said. The de fendant is bound to compensate lower riparian owners for any Injury which may be done to their domestic rights by diverting any part of the stream at any stage of Its flow. But In view of the facts, that no Injury has been done to these rights even In the slight est degree, and that the defendant ex pressly disclaims of record any inten tion to Invade them, it seems clear that no ground for an injunction has been shown to exist. In the face of the de fendant's solemn disclaimer of record, nothing heretofore done can be regard ed as a hostile act; and It Is equally clear that the plaintiffs have not suf fered the least perceptible Injury. The right of the Navigation com pany, and the rights possessed by Samuel Wallace and his associates, need not be considered separately. For the purpose of this case I assume these bills to rest uiton Independent foundations; but whatever may be the source or extent or relation to each other of the rights enjoyed by the re spective plaintiffs. If they have suf fered no harm at the hands of the de fendant, and will suffer none when the water now in the pool is pumped Into Roaring Brook, the injunctions asked for should be refused. Upon this point the evidence does not leave us in doubt. In this case also, the defendant disclaims any Intention to Impair or conflict with the plaintiff's right to make a manufacturing use of the stream, and therefore the acts com plained of cannot form the beginning of a hostile use. Whether or not the right of the Navi gation company has been taken or In jured, depends upon the extent of that right; and this requires some consid eration of the acts of assembly. As against .the defendant (if not against the riparian owners on the stream), the company's claim is that "under its churter the grant Is not a mere grant of water power" but Is "a grant of property In the corpus of the water as a chattel," (Brief p. 26), subject merely to the duty of maintaining the navi gation; and although its present right for purposes of navigation and power extends no higher than Mauch Chunk and White Haven respectively, tins claim extends from the source of the river to its mouth. Apparently also the claim extends to the water of ev ery tributary, although the legislative grant speaks merely of "the river Le high," and can only be made to cover the tributary creeks by a liberality of construction which Is not usually ap plied to grants of this character. But, even confined to the main stream, the privilege is unusual In scope and can only be sustained by unambiguous grant. It may be worth nothing that this extensive claim Is made m the course of an argument which denies the legislative competency to grant the defendant a similar privilege. If the Navigation company does own the cor pus of the water In fee simple. It has absolute dominion over It (subject only to the reserved navigation right); and may not only sell It for consumption in the valley of the stream, but may divert it to any point outside the val ley; or may levy toll upon every gallon which quenches the thirst of man or beast along its banks. If the legisla ture could lawfully do this In 1818 and 1822, what has happened since to im pair its power? If it (the - company) really owns the water in fee simple, it has the power to divert It at any time; otherwise, "fee simple" must have some less ex tensive meaning; and In point of fact it does divert permanently from some riparian owners, and has always di verted that part of the stream which flows in its canal. But I think the company's right In the sti-eam will be found upon exami nation 'to come short of a fee simple ownership in all the water not needed for navigation. In support of this construction It Is Important also to notice that neither the parties In Interest nor the legis lature supposed In 1822 that the grant was more extensive than the right to take tolls, and the right to the power of the stream. Strictly construed, I believe this to be the extent of the grant to the Navi gation company; but there Is one quali fication which ought to be made. The grant of water power was for manu facturing uses, and this fact ought not to be lost sight of. When the act was passed, the principal manufacturing use of the water was to propel ma chinery; but now, and for many years past, other manufacturing uses which consume or contaminate the water In some degree have become much more Important. To these uses a part of the stream Is devoted under the contracts between the company and riparian manufacturers; and upon the analogy of Alden's appeal, 93 Pa. 182, I regard this as within the original grant. If this view of the company's right Is sound, it remains to Inquire whether the proposed diversion, now in part accomplished, has taken or injured, or will take or Injure, In any degree the company's Interest In the stream. ThU is a question of fact, and upon the evidence I answer it in the negative. In no respect or degree has th navi gation or the power of the rlvtr or its value for manufacturing use been af fected by what the defendant has done; nor will It be affected by future fillings of the pool when the stream Is In Hood. Unless therefore the defend ant's acts were In'-anded to assert a hostile right, no ground for equitable Interference exists. But to this bill also the defendant answers tnat no claim whatever Is m&de of a right to do any act which will Injure the Navi gation company's Interest in the river; and as rtated - heretofore, this dis claimer of record Is a complete protec tion to the company interest. It was also argued that the defend ant's act is an unlawful Interference with the franchise of the Navigation company: unlawful. because lis charter gives It no power, either ex pressly or by necessary Implication, to take franchises; or, if the power is there, because the necessity for Its ex ercise has not be.n made to appear. In support of this position a well known line of cases Is referred to, of which Pittsburg Junction Railroad company's appeal, 122 Pa 612, and Groff's appeal, 128 Pa. 621, are ex amples. To this I reply, that the In terest of the Navigation company In the water of the upper Lehigh 'Is not easy to define precisely. At present none of these questions arises, because the right of the Navigation company (whatever may be Its nature, and over however much of the stream it may exist in one degree or another) has neither been taken nor injured, and the defendant disclaims the light or the Intention to do It the slightest harm. 'in each suit I think the conclusion must be that an injunction as prayed for, to restrain the defendant from maintaining Its dam and from; pump ing the water therefrom Into Roaring Brook, cannot be granted. But the bills are not to be dismissed. Decrees must be entered, so drawn as to con fine the defendant's power ov$r the stream within the limits fixed by the answers and Indicated In this opinion. Only flood-water is to be taken; and a period In each year ought to be speci fied within which the pool may be filled from this source. Moreover, If the dam Is not now so constructed that the ordinary inflow and outflow of the stream may be accurately measured and regulated, this must be done; and generally, every needful measure must be adopted to protect the rights of the plaintiffs against every reasonable jkm- WOMAN TO WOMAN. Women are being taught by blttet xperlence that many" physicians can not successfully handle their pecu liar ailments knar urn as female diseases. Doctors are willing and anxious to help them, but they arc the wrong sex to work understandinjjly. . . When the woman of to-day ex periences such symp toms as backache, nervousness, lassi tude, whites, o? pain ful men struation, pains in groins, bearing-down sensation, palpitation, "all Xone" feeling and blues, she at one takes Lydia E. Pinklsm's Vegetable Compound, feeling sure of obtaining immediate relief. Should her symptoms be new to her, she writes to a woman, Mrs. IMnkham, Lynn, Mass., who promptly explains her case, and tells her free how to get well. Indeed, so many women are now appealing to Mrs. Plnkhain for advice, that a score of lady secretaries are kept constantly at work answering the great volume of correspondence which comes in every day. Each letter is answered carefully and accurately, as Mrs. Pink ham fully realizes that a life may de pend upon her reply, and into many and many a home has she shed tha ay of happiness. slbility of harm. The bills, also, will be retained as pending proceedings, with leave to either party to applv for any change In the decrees which may be found advisable. John B. McPherson, Speclr lly Presiding. PRlCfcBUKG. , Eagle Hose company. No. 1, will open the fair and festival, this evening In Smith's hall, over postofllce. An excel lent programme will be given in the line of entertainment. Admission ten cents. Mr. John Kukuskl, of Plymouth, vis ited relatives here yesterday. Drs. Laubach, Van Sickle and Bll llvemer performed the operation for appendicitis upon Master Willie Heb roud yesterday afternoon. So far as is known it has been successful. ' The wigwam of Washtella tribe. No. 169, Improved Order of Red men, Oly phant, was largely filled last evening with red men from Nos. 72, of Provi dence; 107, of Prlceburg; 211, of Peck vllle, and 247, of Taylor. The pro gramme of he evening was excellent. A pale face was adopted Into the ...oe. after which, for the good of the order, the following programme wa.s ron dered: Corn and venison, served by the committee of 1R9; Songs by John Saunders, of Nu. 72, Providence, on Redmanshlp, composed by himself, which were most excellent: songs by James Cousins and Joseph Pratt, Will lam Cousin and Ed Saunders, of No. 72. Providence; song. Thomas Petch, of No. 107, Prlceburg; songs by Hy Fletcher and John Wright. No.' 211, Peckvllle; Recorder William Kennedy, the kicking buffalo of No, 107. Prlce burg; remarks by District Grand Sach em William Harshorn, of No. 72: Jast Sachems Thomas Saunders. Daniel H. Coleman, of No. 72; William Kennedy, Thomas Petch, of 107; M. B. Wedeman, C. P. Hartman, John Mitchell, of No. 211, which was yery Interesting and encouraging for the brothers to know how the order Is Increasing in these hunting grounds. The Red Men are such a lively set of fellows when they get out they must have a good time, and they enjoyed It up to a late hour, when they returned to their private wigwams. AVOCA. Following Is the programme which will be given by the Avoca Musical so ciety on Mondav evening: Address, chairman; chorus, Avoca Musical soci ety; recitation, Miss Annie Dommer muth; violin solo, Mr S. Hamlil'tt; In strumental duett, Messrs. Sheehan and Greenfield; solo, Mrs. Atwell; recita tion, Mr. William Jennings: solo, Mr. David Stephens; duett, Messrs. Philip Thomas and Joseph Johns; piano solo, Mr. John K. O iMalley; solo, Mr. Philip Warren: duett. Misses B. Dempscy and L. Hlnes; solo. Mr. T. P. Watkins; se lection. Mooslc Cornet band; solo, Mr. Philip ThoniRs; duett, Messrs. D. Steph ens and P. H. Warren; recitation, Miss Mary Davis; solo, Mr. Joseph Johns; chorus, Avoca Musical society. BREAKFAST AT GRANT'S TABLE A Hungry Newspaper Man Who ln vitcd Ilimsell to Gen. Grnut Table. After the officers at headquarters had obtained what Bleep they could get, they arose about daylight, feeling that In all probability they would witness be fore night cither a fight or a foot-race a flcht If the armies encountered each other, a foot-race to secute good positions If the armies remained apart. General Meade had started south at dawn, moving along the Uermanna road. General Grant intended to re main In his present camp till BurnElde arrived, in order to give him soir.e directions In person regarding ha movements. The general sat down to the breakfast-table after nearly all the staff -officers had finished their morning meal. While he was slowly sipping hU coffee, a young newspaper reporter, whose appetite, combintd with his spirit of enterprise, had gained a sub stantial victory over his modesty, slipped up to the table, took a seat at the farther end, and remarked, "Then I wouldn't mind taking a cup of some thing warm myself, if there's no ob jection." Thereupon seizing a coffee pot, he poured out a full ration of that soothing army beverage, and, after helping himself to some of the other dishes, proceeded to eat breakfast with an appetite which had evidently been stimulated by long hours of fasting. - The general paid no more attention to this occurrence than he would have paid, to the flight of a bird across his path. He scarcely looked at the In truder, dd not utter a word at the time, and made no mention of it after ward. It was a fair sample of the im perturbability of his nature as to triv ial matters taking place about him. "Campaigning with Grant,' by General Horace Porter, In the December Cen tury. THE SOCIAL WAR. . . What tha Kelt Great Armed Conflict - ' ill Be About. The Civil War In the United States turned upon slavery Incidentally, nqt vitally. The cause of that great fight lay much deeper. In the same way the Social War which is coming will turn Incidentally, upon religion, and be per hans called a religious wftr heron rror- but It will not be declared for the sakel of faltn against unbeller, nor be fought at first by any church, or alliance of churches, against atheism. . It , will simply turn out that the men who fight I S Ml llll IK,- Ik u I on the one side will have either thy THi LEADER 124 and 126 Wyoming-Ave. Oi IB ill III ITdVA vnn Hnna vrntp PhHaf mna vb WHIMSU4W4 uuvt Mb WU V JVU aVUUVff tti on the last day before Christinas you can never Jnd such a complete . and elaborate assortment as you can If you call early t . We atill have '. an unbroken lime of tho choicest Holidav j - n v,..jHiug "... wuivuivu U3V1UI ctuiA ucauauia ajk Christmas Gifts, and we are convinced that the lowne33 of our prices will take you by surprise. In view wo uav uiitue sumo mrge reductions man 01 me loiiowing aepartv inenis : , . ... FUFMIMC HNn TPPPT CinilPC bUblllllU 11IIU JIULLI ULUULJ. GFNTS' FHRMKHIMC UblllU 1 1111VJ UVVUJ) SILK AND WOOL MUFFLERS, REAL LflCE HANDKERCHIEFS, LINEN AND SILK HANDKERCHIEFS. HRNn FMRRHinFRFn HANnKFRfHlFFS a m a a aw asaia a a a a a a a a a a FEATHER BOAS UMBRELLAS GLOVES MANICURE SETS TOILET SETS ODOR SETS -SHAYING SETS SOFA CUSHIONS ART-GOODS' JEWELRY BOXES WORK BOXES GLOVE BOXES Handkerchief Boies NECKTIE BOXES - ALL SIZES DOLLS, ALL PRICES. Our Siovr mechanicil window display,, "The Dolls' Ball," Ism popular as it ever was, and if you will bring the children it will certainly amuse them. , We also beg to announce that due to the advance of ths season we have made n bg reduction in all Silks, Dress Goods, Cloaks and Millinery. Those desirous of an early selection should purchase How. ' IEBEGK I COR con v lit Ion or the prejudices of Chris tianity, or both, and that their adver saries will have neither.- But the struKKle will be at Its height when the original steady current of facts which led to Inevitable strife has sunk Into apparent Insignificance under the rag Inn storm of conflicting belief and un belief. . . The dlfiadvantaee of the unbelievers will lie in the fact that belief Is positive and assertive, whereas unbelief Is nega tive and argumentative. It .la Indeed easier to deny than to prove almost anything. But that Is not the ques tion. In life and war It Is generally easier to keep than to take, and be sides, those who believe "care," as we say, whereas those who deny generany "care" very little. It Is probable, to say the least of It, that so long as the so siallsts of the .near future believe as sertively that they have discovered the means of saving humanity Join misery and poverty, and tight for pure con viction, they will have the better of It; but that when they find themselves in the position of attacking half of man kinds religious faith, having no Idea, but only a proposition, to offer In Its place, they will be beaten. . That seems far from the question of divorce, but It Is not. Before the battle the opposing forces are encamped and intrenched at a lltt'e distance from each ot he-, and each tries to under mine the others outworks. Socialism, collectively, has dug a mine under So cial Orders strongest tower, winch Is called marriage, and the edifice Is be ginning to shake from Its foundations, even before the slow-match Is llgfited. Fiom "A Rose of kesterday, by Mar lon Crav.-ford, In the December Cen tury. . Reduced Rntcs'to Washington on Ac count of the Inaagbrotion via Penn sylvania Knilioad. For the benefit of those who deslro to attend the ceremonies Incident to the inauguration v'of ' Pre.sident-elect McKlnley, the Pennsylvania Railroad company will sell "excursion tickets to Washington March 1, 2, 3,. and 4, valid to'return from Maroh'4 to 8, at the fol lowing rates: From New York, $8.00; Philadelphia, S5.40; Baltimore, $1.60; Hnrrlsburg. 15.08; Wllllamsport, $8.79; Buffalo, $11.20; Rochester. $10.48; Al toona and Pittsburg,' $10.00; and from all other stations on the Pennsylvania system at reduced rates. This inauguration will be a most In teresting event, and will undoubtedly attract a large number of people from every section of , the country. The magnificent facilities of the Pennsylvania railroad make this line the favorite route to the national capi tal at All times, and its enormous equip ment and spltndid terminal advan tages at Washington make it especial ly popular on such occasions, CASTOR A ( -tor Infants and Children. Km MTj -PLEASANT COAL AT R ETA I U jcoti of the best quality for domestto iim tod of an slses, tnclsdlng Buckwheat and Mlrdssy, dstltsrsd la any part of ttas city. h towsst prtos. iOMors-Ncslvcd at tho Offlts. flrst floor, ponmoawoalth bonding, room No. 4; V Ph?5 "111 bs promptly sttsndnl "rfuni im ui i,jc. 1 . WM. T.SMITH. ! ..S ' ..i? eriAnnfnrr Tinfe va Vha 4tt Gonris of the nearness of the Holidays GHiliiY; n a a a a a a atr a a a a a. a. a a a a a a PIN CUSHIONS SLIPPER CASES TOILET CASES LEATHER GOODS JEWELRY ALBUMS BRIC-A-BRAC. ESTABLISHED THIRTY YEARS. NOW IN 00R HEW STORE, 130 WYOMING AVENUE. Coal Exchsngs. Opp, HottlJeraya, W hove tha Snast stors and most complsti stock In all this section, of ' WITCHES, FINE JEWELRY, DIMI0N03, STERLING SILVER WAR!, STERLING SILVER NOVELTIES, RICH CUT GLISS, CLOCKS, ETC. Our Prices are always bottom. If you bav not seen us la onr ntw stors II will pay you to call. - . X Brewery ''win ; , i .t Uanufaetursrs of tao Cslibralst CAPACITVi 100,000 Barrels per Acnum THS iOSIC POWDER CO., ROOMS I AND 2, COM'LTH VL'Vi, SCRANTON, PA. WINING AND BLASTING POWDER MADE AT MOOSIC AND DALB WORK. iraEl.CONIi IS 1? BSBBBBBBBBBBanBB 1 LAFUN RAND POWDER CO't ORANGE GUN POWDER Elcctrlo Batteries, Klectrio Exploders, for . plodlug blasts, Safety Flu and Repawn) Chemical Ox's expSb y