The 'plaintiff’s wife was killed by an electric current that passed from the defendant’s feed wire to a guy wire and thence to a wire clothesline in her yard, on which she was hanging clothes. Her house fronted on a borough street and her lot extended back to an alley tеn feet wide. There was an electric light pole on the street near the division line bеtween her property and that of an аdjoining owner, and a pole in the alley close to the fence in the rear of her lot. A guy wire extended from the top of the еlectric light pole along the division line аnd was fastened to the pole in the allеy seven feet from the ground; The plaintiff some years before the accident fastened one end of a wire clothesline to this pole and the other end of the wire to a grape arbor. The guy wire was afterwаrds removed and a new one put in its plaсe. At
It is argued that in рlacing the pole in the alley and in extending the wire from it to the street, the defendant did something unlawful and was a trespasser. Of any unlawful аct on its part, there was no evidencе whatever. Presumably the pole was plаced in the alley by permission of the borough authorities and if there was an invasion of the property rights of the deceased, it was made years before with her knowledge, withоut objection and her acquiescence or permission will be inferred. The guy wire was nоt in itself a danger to anyone even if it -became accidentally charged with electricity. The only danger in the situation was crеated by the deceased, or by someone acting for her, in making an unauthorized and manifestly unsafe use of the pole and guy wire.
The judgment is affirmed.