There is also good authority for the proposition that a violation of an ordinance of this sort does not establish liability of the violator to the one injured thereby, but to the municipality alone. Taylor v. Lake Shore M. So. R. Co. 45 Mich. 74, 7 N.W. 728, 40 Am. R. 457; Moore v. Gadsden, 93 N.Y. 12; City of Rochester v. Campbell, 123 N.Y. 405, 25 N.E. 937, 10 L.R.A. 393, 20 A.S.R. 760; Frank v. Muller, 200 App. Div. 639, 193 N.Y. S. 416; Harbin v. Smith, 168 Tenn. 112, 76 S.W.2d 107. Defendant was entitled to directed verdicts as requested. Defendant owed plaintiffs no common-law duty to remove this cap from the sidewalk. If the cap was a danger to pedestrians or a nuisance on the sidewalk, neither defendant nor any of its officers or servants placed it there. Defendant owed no duty to travelers to remove from the sidewalk in front of its place of business matters in the nature of obstructions to safe passage or a nuisance if the same were not placed there or created by it or its servants.
In the absence of participation, the landlord could not be held liable for the negligence of his tenant in placing the dilapidated piano thereon. ( Tagg v. Senner, 277 N.Y. 692; Frank v. Muller, 200 App. Div. 639, affd. 235 N.Y. 540; Greenberg v. Kruger, Inc., 231 App. Div. 800, affd. 256 N.Y. 612.)