
    McCall, Appellant, v. Coates.
    
      Cities of the third class — Streets—Grading and paving — Acts of May 23, '1889, and May 16, 1891.
    See Hand v. Fellows, Appellant, ante, page 456.
    Argued Feb. 11, 1892.
    Appeal, No. 274, Jan. T., 1892, by plaintiff, George McCall, from decree of C. P. Delaware Co., dismissing bill filed against Joseph R. T. Coates, mayor, and William H. Hall, controller, of the city of Chester.
    Before Paxson, C. J., Stebrett, Green, Williams, McCollum, Mitchell and Hendrick, JJ.
    ' Bill in equity praying an-injunction to restrain the mayor and city controller from entering into a contract for paving in pursuance of an ordinance of the city of Chester.
    Plaintiff’s bill in this case was similar to that filed in the preceding case. It alleged that an ordinance had been passed for the paving of Seventh street in the city of Chester, under act of May 23,1889, that that act was unconstitutional, and also that it was superseded and repealed by the act of May 16,1891, and prayed an injunction against the mayor and controller restraining the first from making and the second from approving a contract in pursuance of the said ordinance.
    April 18, 1892.
    The case was heard on bill, answer and replication, and the court, Clayton, P. J., delivering an opinion, dismissed the bill at the costs of the plaintiff. Plaintiff appealed.
    
      Errors assigned were (1) the decree dismissing plaintiff’s bill; (2) failure to award an injunction as prayed for.
    
      W. B. Broomall, for appellant. —
    The provisions of the act of May 23, 1889, providing for liens and the procedure for enforcing the same are unconstitutional, because they are obnoxious to the constitution, article III, section 7: Ruan Street, 132 Pa. 257; Wyoming Street, 137 Pa. 494; Wheeler v. Phila., 77 Pa. 338; Phila. v. Haddington Church, 115 Pa. 294; Scranton v. Silkman, 113 Pa. 191: Betz v. Phila., 21 W. N. C. 155.
    
      Orlando Harvey, for appellee,
    relied on the cases cited by appellant in Hand v. Fellows, Appellant, ante, page 456.
   Opinion by

Me. Justice Williams,

This case depends on the construction of the act of May 16, 1891, the question being, whether it repeals § 10, art. V, of the act of May 23, 1889, relating to the paving and improvement of streets in cities of the third class. The same question was presented by the Appeal of Fellows et al., from the common pleas of Lackawanna county, in which an opinion is handed down herewith.

For the reasons there given the decree in this case is affirmed.  