The same prohibition has been extended to fruit or lunch stands and booths, if public transit is materially interfered with ; People v. Keating, 168 N. Y. 390, 61 N. E. 637; Chi cago v. Pooley, 112 Ill. App. 343 ; State v. Berdetta, 73 Ind. 185, 38 Am. Rep. 117 ; also to hack stands.; Odell v. Bretney, 38 Misc. Rep. 603, 78 N. Y. Supp. 67; Pennsylvania Co. v. Chicago, 181 Ill. 289, 54 N. E. 825, 53 L. R. A. 223 ; and to lunch wagons ; Spencer v. Mahon, 75 S. C. 232, 55 S. E. 321; Com. v. Morrison, 197 Mass. 199, 83 N. E. 415, 14 L. R. A. (N. S.) 194, 125 Am. St. Rep. 338 (contra, where it does not appreciably inter fere with traffic; [1908] 1 K. B. 555) ; and weighing scales ; State v. Vandalia, 119 Mo. App. 406, 91 S. W. 1009 (contra, Spencer v. Andrew, 82 Ia. 14, 47 N. W. 1007, 12 L. R. A. 115) ; and boxes for waste paper with ex clusive advertising privileges ; State v. St. Louis, 161 Mo. 371, 61 S. W. 252 ; I'eople v. Clean Street Co., 225 Ill. 470, 80 N. E. 298, 9 L. R. A. (N. S.) 455, 116 Am. St. Rep. 156.
granted authority ; Com. v. Morrison, 197 Mass. 199, 83 N. E. 415; 14 L. R. A. (N. S.) 194; McCaffrey v. Smith, 41 Hun (N. Y.)'117.
An ordinance making it unlawful to bold public meetings in city streets is constitu tional; Fitts v. Atlanta, 121 Ga. 567, 49 S. E. 793, 67 L. R. A. 803, 104 Am. St. Rep. 167; so of an ordinance forbidding any public ad dress upon any public property ; Com. v. Da vis, 162 Mass. 510, 39 N. E.113, 26 L. R. A. 712, 44 Am. St. Rep. 389 ; and of a statute prohibit ing unauthorized bodies of men from drilling or parading with arms in cities or towns ; Cora. v. Murphy, 166 Mass. 171, 44 N. E.138, 32 L. R. A. 606; and an ordinance forbidding the beating of drums in the streets of a city with out permission of the mayor (here held to cover the Salvation Army); Wilkes-Barre v. Garebed, 9 Kulp (Pa.) 273. A Salvation Army parade was held not to be an unlawful and tumultuous assembly ; L. R. 9 Q. B. Div. 308 ; and in 57 L. T. N. S. 366, it was held that an ordinance prohibiting playing upon a musical instrument upon the street was void and that a Salvation Army was not punish able thereunder. In In re Gribben, 5 Okl. 379, 47 Pac. 1074. it was held that an ordi nance prohibiting the making of noise upon the streets by musical instruments was in valid. As to playing organs on the street, see [1897] 1 Q. B. 84.
There is no right to display a red flag in a parade, which is likely to cause a breach of the peace; People v. Burman, 154 Mich. 150, 117 N. W. 589, 25 L. R. A. (N. S.) 251.
One is not a trespasser if he is merely play ing on the street ; Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. McArthur, 53 Fed. 464, 3 C. C. A. 594. 10 II. S. App. 546. An attempt by 'a municipal corporation to prohibit loitering on the streets, so far as applied to persons conduct ing themselves in a peaceable, orderly man ner, disturbing no one and committing no overt act, was held an interference with the constitutional right of personal liberty ; St.
Louis v. Gloner, 210 Mo. 502, 109 S. W. 30, 15 L. R. A. (N. S.) 494, 124 Am. St. Rep. 750; contra, Taylor v. Sandersville, 118 Ga. 63, 44 S. E. 845. An or Ahance pro viding that whenever three or more per sons obstruct a sidewalk, it should be the duty of the officer to request them to move on, and to arrest them upon refusing, was held unconstitutional ; State v. Hunter, 106 N. C. 796. 11 S. E. 366, 8 L. R. A. 529.
An individual has no right to have an auc tion in a street ; Com. v. Milliman, 13 S. & R. (Pa.) 403 ; or to keep a crowd of carriages standing therein ; 3 Camp. 230; or to attract a disorderly crowd of people to witness a caricature in a shop-window ; 6 C. & P. 636. It is held that an abutting owner may stop his carriage in front of his property, though it extend in front of the adjoining property, or may have a line of carriages running in front of neighbor's property, provided such use be reasonable and that a neighbor be al lowed to drive up to his own door if desired ; Jessel, M. R., in 5 Ch. Div. 713.
An encroachment upon a street, the dedica tion and acceptance of which is established, is nothing more or less than a nuisance, which cannot be aided by lapse of time; Yates v. Warrenton, 84 Va. 337, 4 S. E. 818, 10 Am. St. Rep. 860. In a suit -by abutting owners to enjoin obstruction, no other par ties defendant are necessary than the alleged trespasser;. Hart v. Buckner, 54 Fed. 925, 5 C. C. A. 1.
A city is not responsible for every unau thorized act resulting in injury to travellers on a street ; Joliet v. Seward, 86 I11. 402, 29 Am. Rep. 35. So of coasting on a street ; 'Alt vater v. Baltimore, 31 Md. 462 ; Dudley v. Flemingsburg, 115 Ky. 5, 72 S. W. 327, 60 L. R. A. 575, 103 Am. St. Rep. 253, 1 Ann. Cas. 958 ; horse racing ; McCarthy v. Munising, 136 Mich. 622, 99 N. W. 865 ; riding a bicycle on the sidewalk ; Jones v. Williamsburg, 97 Va. 722, 34 S. E. 883, 47 L. R. A. 294; ani mals running at large ; Rivers v. Augusta, 65 Ga. 376, 38 Am. Rep. 787 (otherwise where it had become a common nuisance and source of danger ; Cochrane v. Frostburg, 81 Md. 54, 31 Atl. 703, 27 L. R. A. 728, 48 Am. St. Rep. 479) ; firing explosives in a street ; Campbell's Adm'x v. Montgomery, 53 Ala. 527, 25 Am. Rep. 656 ; firing a cannon ; Robison v. Green ville, 42 Ohio St. 625, 51 Am. Rep. 857 ; riot ing on the streets, unless there is a statutory provision to the contrary ; Bryant v. Orange burg, 70 S. C. 137, 49 S. E. 229. But where a city, without authority, permitted a fair to be held in one of its streets, it was held liable to one who was injured in leaving such fair show while passing on an unsafe plat form in the street giving access thereto ; Van Cleef v. Chicago, 240 III. 318, 88 N. E. 815, 23 L. R. A. (N. S.) 636, 130 Am.. St. Rep. 275. See, generally, a note to 23 L. R. A. (N. S.) 636.