, 1881-02-13

to HORSEPOWER. or that v1nducts should De
prcctad Mt the street-cfosslngs. The latter
nolicv. being clearly In the interest OF tne
railways. and securing to them the nnoo=
strncteti use Ut steam power at almost un-
l;,nitcd rates of speed Mt all hours and with /
all manner Of trains, has been aooptea Wy
the city rather than ths exclusion OF Inc ia''-
ways inside of certain lines or the Anl1tatlon
of the use Of steam in the CITY,
Tn concetline that there is an obllgaton On
tho nart of the railways to build these Wit
ducts. the railways admit the libernlty ol
the city. and that the surrender OF the pupllc
rirlt to the free use of tho streets lmp!les
tl,e obIIgatlon Oh the part Of the railways 70
furnish the public other foadways In place
Of those surrendered to them
The right Of the public to tho free and un-
obstructabcrossnq Of the streets Is a permn-
nent right, not one limited to few months
of few years. Can the substitution OF
tennorary yiaduct, one insufficient to sustain
the travel beyond a few years, and in order
tn be at all safe for use requiring to bo re-;
paired every few weeks Or months and re-
peved every few years, be legal or equAta-
bic performance Of tho contract anu duty 20
furnish a proper and sufficient highway to
the public foe the one surrendered 10 Lie
railway? Who will say SO?
Tho privilege to cross the public streets IS
one that these failway corporations expect to
enjoy and exercise for all time. Is the erec-
tlon Of fragile, temporary structure, that
NAV fall down or wear out in four or i've
wears any such compensation or eQulvalenG
for the permanent and forever use OF the
street as will discharge such railway from
any further obligation to maintain the via
duct in safe and proper condition? we
trow not. If the railways demand as q ne-
cessity for their business the permanent anu
perpetual use Of the surface Of public streets
and crossings, to the permanent and perpet~
! mi exclusion of the Chicago public. Is it un-
| lust and unreasonable to require of them al
! equally permanent and perpetual use OF
| yiad@,ct over which the citizens can pass
| OF what use Is d yfaduct so out Of repair, SO
badly constructed, and built Of such insult
able materials that it cannot he Travelled with
safety. and is perpetual menace to those
| who venture upon It?
The city grants to the railways doing busl-
| ness here what nosother great clty.il America
offcrs,-tlle free and unobstructed right to
cross. its streets on the grade surface os'
| steam power at all hours, upon the single
condition that the railways shall build over
the crossings of these streets other permanent
bridges or yiaducts for the public use. The
railways now refuse to build such permanent
viaducts. They offer to put up temporary
structures and no more, and claim that thel
are acting Justly towards the public. But
this WON'T do; it will not be accepted.
| One argument offered Is, that, when per-
mission to use the streets was granted, they
| were largely out OH the pra1ries at the tl'ne'
and some of them perhaps not yet lad out
To this sort of sophistry 1t is sufficient to say
hat at that time each railroad did not rul
more than from one to three trains day, pas
seucer and freight and the occupancy OF the
street-crossings did not exceed ten to llfteen
minutes during the whole twenty-1our hours
while now there are from 50 to loo trains
day on each of those roads. A multitude o
cars and tracks occupy the street-crosslng
constantly during the whole twehty-tou
hours of each day. So constantly 90 tn
: roads OCCUPY the crossings with their frelgll
, | and MESSENGER trains and their switching
, locomotives, that the people find it nearl
| impossible to get across, and are in sucl
constant peril Of destruction that life Itself
| becoming burden
, It is also argued by some Of the rallroa
q attorneys that the city erects bridges over Ii
a river and does not require the Vesse-o"nel
! to keep the bridges III repair, or to rene'
: them. or to operate them. This criticism ha
a NO relevancy whatever. The river is not tt
!. nroperty of the city, nor one Of its street
! md the right to build bridges has bee
a granted the city by the United States.
: which the river belongs, just as the Gil
| grants the railways the privilege OF bulidln
q yiaducts i'll compensation for the use OF Il
q streets. But having built the BRIDGES Il
: clty does nor insist that 1t Is the duty OF II
g. United States to keep them in repair, al
>. rebuild them when they give out OF: tumo
Y into the stream :,
=. The city is the absolute owner Of Il
!. streets, and the railways can only use the
&c by the consent of the city, and OIL police re
ulations, as the city may dictate. The CT
:, may adopt the same regulations Tor stre'
n crossings that it has adopted at the bridge
r. | It may provide gates oil both sides p1 ea
" street crossing, and close these gates
- street travel every ten minutes, ar
"a opening them to street travel clo
~ them to strcet-crossing by the Sailwa
=, every alternate ten minutes. How won
: the railways like this just regulation, VIM
of would place them oil the same footing vi
II those who navigate the river? Moreovt
- the great danger from railroads at street
,o crossings is tho use Of steam power. II
t;c danger may be- wholly obviatea by the use
ID horse power by railroads within the city Ii
av its. # the railways will not erect viadue
~ and keep them i'll repair, and renew TIL
10 when necessary, then let the city aband
90 the yiaducts and resume the control OF
street-crossings. They are the lnallena'
property Of the city, and are the natural,
IS well as the more convenient, highways
,c- the public. II we cannot have yiaducts,
Ids can at least restore the free use Of the sire
III, to the public for the purposes to which II
,or were dedicated. II the railroads take Il