The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-07-24
Metropolitan S. r. Co. Address Com.
municaton to the Aldermen,
BOARD OF ALDERMEN.


city board of equalization on the evening of
August 6.
The hospital board made report recommend
the city hospital and the awarding of the con-
tracts for the work in accordance with the &C.
ton of the Council. Mr. Seibert opposed the
work, because the board had not been consulted
about ii, and Mr.. Tucker made eight or ten
speeches, in which he rather favored the work
being done, and at the same time revived some
ancient history, in which he was the chief figure
The resolution was adopted and the report con-
Cured in by a vote of 2 to 1, Mr.. seibert being
the solitary negative. The bonds of the con-
tractors, John A. Buchanan, Clark & Macauley,
were then approved. The action of the Council
was concurred in in ordering watermains to be
laid on Seventh and North Alabama streets, near
the Exposition building, for sprnklng purposes.
THE STREET RAILWAY MATTER.
The following communication from the Metro
politan Street Railway Company was read:
'INDIANAPoLIs, July %.
ITO the Mayor and Members of the Board of Alder
men and Common Council Of the City of lndianapo-
"Gentlemen-I am instructed by the Metro
politan Street Railway Company to say that the
company was organized in good faith for the
purpose of building and operating lines Of street
railway in this city. The persons interested be-
lieving that such an enterprise would be a mu-
tual benefit to the city and those investing their
capital in the business, asked for the passage of
an ordinance granting them the right to con-
struot certain lines, and providing and stipulat-
lag that the lines, when built and operated,
should be In every way flrst-class, and such as
would give to the public an improved service,
one better than any that had been heretofore
furnished the citizens of this CITY; such plat
form cars, with conductors; reduced rate of
fare, with transfers from one line to an
other without additional fare, and with the
tracks laid with rails such re-
quired in all cities having improved street
railway facilities and laid in such n manner as
Lot to obstruet or hinder the use of the streets
by other vehicles, but so constructed that
vehicles could by driven along and upon the
tracks easily as upon other parts of the street.
The passage of the ordinance petitoned
for by over 1000 citizens of the city, as the in
vestlnent of a large sum of money and the
enlargement OF competition In street-railway
business could not fail to be great benefit 20
the city as it has always proven to be in other
cities. This company believed that they would
be welcomed by the people and the city govern
ment and be granted, at least, equal chance
to invest their money in such way as to i'm
prove the street-railway facilities of the CITY
and benefit themselves, Notwithstanding the op-
position of the company now owning and oper-
atipg all the lines in the city
But this the city government has not in its
wisdom seen fit to grant. OF the three routes
asked for by this company, the one that pos
sessed the greatest inducements for profits and
that connecting the Exposition building, Atlas
Engine-works courthouse, markethouse and
Union Depot and had the great
along its proposed line and upon
which greater number of the citizens petition
ing for the ordinance resided, was stricken out
and refused thus in a great measure destroying
the inducement to invest money In the enter
prise.
The original ordinance asked for by this COM
pany provided that the track of the railway
shall be laid with iron steel rail having a
lower tramway of not less than three inches,
etc" This is the standard street-oar rail used in
all cities having frst-class street-car facilities,
and the only one allowed in larger cities, and
is required because it affords less obstruction to
vehicles.
driven upon and over by carriages. wagons,
etc.
bodies this provision is stricken out and the fol-
lowing inserten "The track of any such rail
way shall be laid with the newest and most ap
| proved style of girder rail, having the joints
| bolted, ETC." The girder rail is not in general
use in any OF the large cities, and is absolutely
| prohibited in many. 1t is or is claimed to he
| protected by a patent ana the claim OF the
| person owning and controlling the patent
is that it is superior to other rails
| cannot be driven upon by other vehicles, and
| thus worn ont by general travel on the street.
| while the regulation tramrail may suffer very
considerably by reason of the driving of vehicles
other than street-cars upon IT,
The patent upon the "Glrder rail" is owned or
| controlled bv persons interested in the Citizens
| Street-rallway Company, of this city, who are
| in every way seeking to prevent any interior
| ence with the monopoly they now enjoy. Hence
| it can be readily understood why that company
desired this company to be restricted to the use
of the "Girder RAIL-" and that, in undertaking to
comply with the terms OF the ordinance passed.
| this company would be subjected to any royalty
| or license that might be demanded, or be abso-
| lutey denied the right to use the rail required;
| so that, in short, the ordinance, passed,
places 1t IN the power OF the Citizens Street
railway Company, or those interested in it. to
hinder, delay, or entirely prevent a compliance
| with the terms of the ordinance
The ordinance passed has number of other
| restrictions which place it in the power of the
| city government to very much embarrass the
| business of the company at any time. II these
| were the only Objectionable features the com
| ngnV mix fO IN
the fairness of the city government in the future
! In exercising powers granted IN the ordinance.
| But feeling that the Objectionable features of
| this ordinance as herein pointed out were lncOr-
| porated for The purpose of preventing this COM
pany from ever accepting It's provisions, and
| that it was done, as we are Informed, at the in
| stance of those interested in preventing any
competition in street railway lines in this city,
this company does not desire to invest Its cap
| ital in the enterprise and, therefore, respect
| fully declines to accept the provisions of
| general ordinance number 10, 1885 entitled ian
ordinance authorizing the construction, extern
sion ami operation of the Metropolitan Railway
| line in and upon the streets Of Indianapolis"
But this company desire to say that they are
| ready and willing to invest capital, build and
! operate a line or lines OF street railway in In
willing to grant them the right to do so in such
| manner as will give them fair chance to COM
pete for business and equal chance with
other corporations enjoying similar privileges.
Attorney for the Metropolitan street-rallway
| Company.
MI. Tncker MADE a vehement speech, In which
he said that Mr.. Hamilton had swindled the
! Board by getting the provision regarding the
G rider rail inserted in the ordinance without ex
| planning what it was Alderman Hamilton re-
torted that the charge was false and that settled
| it.
Alderman Rorison offered the following, which
| was adopted:
Resolved, That the city attorney be and is
| hereby Instructed to prepare an exact copy of
| the original Metropolitan street-railway ordin-
ance and have the same introduced in the
Council for action thereon, and that it ia the
| sense OF this board that the same should pass.
| Also, that the communication from said com
| pany he transmitted with this resolution"
On motion of Mr. Tucker it was ordered that
| the hoard q health analyze the wafer Of a nnm-