BALTIMORE CITY. 865

lot to pave or repair the footways in front thereof, agreeable to the ordi-
nances to be passed by it.

Bassett v. Ocean City. US Md. 114. State v. Kent County, S3 Md, 379.
Notice must be given with opportunity to be heard.

Johns Hopkins Club v. Balto., 130 Md. 282.

(g) REGULATING USE OF STREET.

Obstructions and Encroachments.

1898, ch. 123.

To regulate the use of streets, highways, roads, public places and side-

walks by foot passengers, animals, vehicles, cars, motors and locomotives,
and prevent encroachment thereon and obstruction of the same.

C. & P. Tel. Co. v. Baltimore City. 89 Md. 705. Hagerstown v Klotz, 93 Md. 440.
Townsend. Grace & Co. v. Epstein. 93 Md. 537. Baltimore City v. Beck, 96 Md. 190.
B. & C. R. R. Co. v. Balto. City, 98 Md. 536. Knight v. Balto. City, 97 Md. 649.
Balto. City v. Walker. 98 Md. 640. Brauer v. Refrigerator Co., 99 Md. 376.

As to widening of sidewalks by city, see Klein v. U. Rys. & Elec. Co., Daily Record.
January 4, 1906.

For decisions arising out of the exercise and construction of powers under para-
graph (G), see,

Mayor & C. C. of Balto, v. Marriott, 9 Md. 160. Roman v. Strauss. 10 Md. 89.
Mayor, &c.. Balto, v. Pennington. 15 Md. 12. Altvater v. Mayor, 31 Md. 462. Houck
v. Wachter. 34 Md. 265, Peddicord's Case, 34 Md. 463. Mayor, &c.. v. Holmes.
39 Md. 243. Flyim v. Canton Co., 40 Md. 312. Mayor, &c., Balto, v. O'Donnell, 53
Md. 110. Turner v. Holman, 54 Md. 148. Gore v. Brubaker. 55 Md. 87. Canal Co.
v. County Commrs.. 57 Md. 201. Textor v. B. & O. R. R. Co., 59 Md. 63. Sinclair
v. Baltimore, 58 Md. 598. Crook v. Pitcher, 61 Md. 510.

Thomas v. Ford. 63 Md. 346. Taylor v. Cumberland, 64 Md. 68. Garrett v.
Janes. 65 Md. 260. Kennedy v. Cumberland, 65 Md. 514. C. & P. Tel. Co. v. Mc-
Kenzle. 74 Md. 49, 50. Koch v. N. Ave. Ry. Co., 75 Md. 229. N. Balto. R. R. Co. v. N.
Ave. R. R. Co.. 75 Md. 233. N. Balto R. R. Co. v. Baltimore, 75 Md. 247. Twilley v.
Perkins, 77 Md. 262, Lake Rol. El. R. R. Co. v. Balto., 77 Md. 372-381. Green v.
City & Sub. Ry. Co., 78 Md. 307. Condon v. Spriggs, 78 Md. 337. Garrett v. Lake
Rol. Ely. R. R. Co., 79 Md. 277. Postal Teleg. Cable Co. v. Baltimore. 79 Md. 512.
Cochrane v. Frostburg, 81 Md. 54. Ulman v. Charles St. Ave. Co., 83 Md. 145. Bald-
win v. Trlmble. 85 Md. 396. Gunther v. Dranbauer, 86 Md. 1. Reidel v. P., W. &
B. R. R. Co., 87 Md. 158. Worcester Co. v. Ryckman, 91 Md. 37. Mason v. Cumber-
land. 92 Md. 462. Keen v. Havre de Grace. 93 Md. 34. Magaha v. Hagerstown, 95
Md. 69. New Windsor v. Stocksdale, 95 Md. 215.

Turnpike road partly in Baltimore City owned by private corporation and streets
owned by individuals, but used by the public as highways are streets and highways
of Baltimore City within the meaning of tills section.

The Patapsco Electric Co. v. M. & C. C., 110 Md. 310.

City liable for negligence of its contractor digging sewer under its supervision,
evidence showing negligence—pleading.

Hanrahan v. City, 114 Md. 517.

Regulating use of streets—liability—obstruction—defect, street—city liable—ob-
struction on sidewalk left by Its contractor over whom it retains supervision—con-
tributory negligence, plaintiff—not guilty—lights.

McCarthy v. Clark, 115 Md. 454.

Obstruction—railroad track—public street—cutting off access—abutting owner—
proof extent of injury: diminution in market value.

Webb v. B. & O. R. R. Co., 114 Md. 216.

The city has authority under this power to control streets. Chapter 436, Acts of
1924 invalid.

State v. Stewart, 152 Md. 423.