, 1872-11-14
THE CLARK STREET RAILWAY,
The Present Condition of Affairs.
Feeling OF Pfoperty.Owners.

What the Street Railway Mama
gers Desire to Do.
South Clark street was one Of the first estab-
llshed omnibus routes in the city, as our elder
citizens will remember who can recall the s. B.
g. II. O. Walker lines that used to traverse the
thoroughfare between Lake street and Twelfth.
When tho City Railway Company procured the
chnrtorin 1859. Clark street was included in their
franchise, from Twelfth street to Randolph, in
cluding the connection between State and Clark
On Twelfth street,
The opposition to the railway on Clark street
north Of Jackson Was intense. The City Rail-
way Company were not anxious to build their
line through that street at once, but merely
sought to save their franchise. They hoped that
in time the occupancy Of Clark street between
Twelfth and Tventy-sccond street by the tracks
Of the Chicago & Rock Island and Lake Shore
g. Michigan Southern would cease, enabling
Clark street to assume it's true character below
Twelfth. Out Of these circumstances grew 9
compromise, whereby the City Railway Company
without peril to their franchise postponed for
ten years, until 1869, laying tracks in Clark
history Of the subject is compact1y told in the
following decision in the Supreme Court in the
case OF Malcom McNein Us. Chicago City Rail
way Company:
restrain tho Railway Company from constructing its
track Oh South Clark street, between Randolph and
Polk streets in tbs city Of Chicago. The question is
b u s es
the Common Council Of the city, and the resolution Of
acceptance the part Of tho Company. The charter
fiNmrnnv rirht tn
aGps tfaee tn rscy in ns a9d sus9
be- authorized By the Common Council. Full permis-
sion given by ordinance to lay the track the bill
for the completion Of tho railway was fxed IN Section
Of the same ordinance, and by Section forfeiture
fed Before the expiration Of the time these ordi-
nanccs were amended, and the time for the conEtruc-
ton OF the track Clark street extended for the
the amended ordinances {Gary's ordinances, 404).
This anendatory ordnance must be construed US
h IL the
language il to extend Tie period ten years beyond The
The Railway Company, by resolution, accepted the pro-
visions Of the last mentioned ordinance condition
q postponenent Of laying its track during the time
therein mentioned.
the Common Council accepted it By ordinance recit-
ing that the Company had obligated itself to postpone
the laying down Of B track for and during the period
fr4ned <dnrya ordinances 4o5. II this contract did
not constitute Abandonment or surrender OF the
ef & Sa
eleven and six months In which to construct its
railway. This time would expire on the 23d Of No
yeu1ber, 1870. II the Company had intended to
render it's rights there would have been necessity
for the clrcumocution used, but it would have said
deprived Of valuable right by doubtful construction.
The ordinances and resolution must al be viewed to-
meaning Of the whole ascertained.
It contended by the that by the reso
luton and the acceptance thereof the companyag1eed
its privileges granted by the original ordinance. The
Con- Company E 10 be exercised within limited time Be-
fore the expiration Of the time it is extended without
offered, nnd in consideration thereof, and Of the ro-
peal Of certain ordinances, the Company agrees to
the c RI osr Gf tho right 9sne5s Ss The
ceptance: The contract thus completed was
the right What delay was tho result Of the arrange
ment between the city and.the Company? The COM
company asaented upon condition. They we're agreed
to by tho Common Council and the frat proposal at
Grrned.
amenaatory ordinance Of Feb. II, but reatErmed 1t
and complied with the conditions mud repeated tho
was the chief result. When did this period begin
dato Of the amendatory ordinance. That was only
grant Of time not binding upon the Company until ac
topal accordance, and not until the ordinance Of
March was there compliance with the conditions.
When the agreement was consumnlatea with tho
parties, the period Of ten years then began to run
and expired within ten years thereafter.
By consideration Of the ordinances and resolution,
should be added the original time given laying
the track. That the argument Of the Company WIS
M residue Of III the eleven
md six months from the first grant Of the rights in
which to lay the tEaGk Of its railway The same con-
nance adopted the 21st Of November, 1870 and the
time agan extended The decree Of the Court is
affirmed.
In accordance with this decision, the Company
design to lay their tracks at once, and mnko con-
nections with the North Side Railway Company,
who hive already constructed it's tracks to the
south end Of Clark street BRIDGE aud are only
prevented from continuing them to Randolph
street by the opposition Of several owners of lots
between tho bridge and Randolph street. These
parties have obtained a temporary injunction
from Judge Williams, stopping the laying Of the
tracks. The owners Of the Sherman House prop
erty are the complainants, and are supported by
Thomas Lonergan, Janes II. Adsit, and 81. G.
Loonia. It is understood that an arrangement
has been effected by which through cars will be
run from Twenty y-second street to Lincoln Park
and return, as soon as this in junctionis removed
giving the North Side, for t1o first time in its
history; q full connection with all parts Of tho
city.
the feeling Of opposition still remains but
without arguing the case for either party it is
undeniab1e that the property-ow are greatly
divided, with decided growth Of sentiment in
favor Of the street cars. The Messrs. Keep are
large owners on Clark street, and do not hesi-
tate to say that they are willing and desirous
that the horse cars shall run in front of every
foot OF city property they own. The late P. 2.
". Peck was Of the same view, and regarded the
railway as Of value to Clark street. The Pacific
Hotel interest take the same Wow. Numerous
tenants Of elegant stores On Clark street, some
Of them now on State street, declare
that they prefor that their business shall
look ont on street railway. This division
Of opinion has kept the opposition to the Railway
Company from being very numerous1y repre-
sentative in numbers and value of property not
to say that there is not opposition enough to
fully test all the points of the law to this subject
appertaining.
Outsiders and the city ut large may be said to
be an unit on the question, and the residents,