Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1883-10-26
ELEVATOR TRACKS.
The Trouble Between Messrs. John K.
Speed & Co. and the Elevator
Company.
Interviews With Mr.. Speed and Mr..
Robert GallOway-What They Say
About the Matter.

Approaching Mr.. John X. Speed, sab
member of the firm of John K. Speed&
Co., in his Office yesterday afternoon, q
representative of the APPEAL asked for all
the particulars about the trouble with the
Elevator Company and its railway tracks,
as viewed from his standpoint. The ques-
ton was asked:
SIS it a question arising from compe-
tition in ~business?"
To which Mr.. Speed replied very posi-
lively: Il cannot conceive why it should
be so construed. There can be no compe-
tition between our house and the Elevator
Company, from the fact hat we handle
nothing but our W grain. If any other
establishment in our line of business in
the city were to come to US soliciting stor-
age privileges we should certainly, as we
have done, refer them to the Elevator
Company. All the grain stored by us and
sold from our establishment is our own"
What does it cost you to get a carload
OF grain into your house ?"
"If it comes by the Kansas City, Spring
field and Memphis road it costs us Sc per
car-in this way: From that road it is
brought over the tracks of the Mississippi
and Tennessee road, for which we are
charged 50; Their over the Chesapeake,
Ohio and Southwestern, 81 more, and over
the track claimed by the Elevator Com
pany, 81 more, making So in all. Now, 1
want to state to o that about a year ago
the Elevator Company demanded 81 per
car from us, which we declined to pay I'M
til their right to charge anything was es-
tablished. Nothing more was said about
these charges until the completion of the
Kansas City road, and we received our
first shipment over that line, when 81 per
car was demanded. We again objected to
the right of the Elevator Company to
charge tolls, when the switches were
locked on us. 1 then paid the charges, for
which | took a receipt, and L believe Mai.
Burke, of the Mississippi and Tennessee
road, guaranteed the tolls on shipmentsto
the Power Company"
"Do you claim that the Elevator Com
pany has not the right by charter to
charge tolls over those track ?"
"As said before, i have not claimed
that they have not the right, but / do
want the fact established that they have.
When the elevator tracks were put down,
it was my understanding they were to be
free to all, and cars were passed to us so
long without anything being said about
tolls, l was ioath to believe N other way.
When they made the demand of 81 per
car, some time ago, my reply was that l
would pay it if they could establish the
right to charge anything-since which
time, up to a day or two ago, the company
did not press the claim. We have paid no
tolls ever those tracks, except when an
engine had to be employed to transfer
from the Chesapeake, Ohio and South
western road"
"Were you not instrumental in secur-
ing privileges to lay those tracks, from the
city authorities ?"
''In front of our own house we were,
in annna.finn with tha Hono,ar oil N,n
the Power Company and the Electric
Light Company-all of us under the i'm
preston that we would have free priv
ileges over the tracks in front of the ele-
vator, with which our tracks are con-
nected. We were under the impression
the elevator tracks were laid by the Mem
phis n Charleston railway for the mu-
tual benefit OF the elevator, the railroads
and the houses west of the railway lines
and south OF the elevator"
There is a petition in circulation bear
ing on the subject-do you know any
thing about it?"
eyes, here is a petition to the city au-
thorities explaining that we are debarred
from free passage over the elevator tracks,
and praying that we be allowed to put
down tracks free for all from Jefferson to
Adams streets"
NR. ROBERT GALLowAY's STATEMENT.
Mr.. Robert Galloway, superintendent of
the Elevator Company, was interviewed
in his Office yesterday morning relative to
the trouble about the company's tracks,
which were recently closed against free
traffic. Mr.. Galloway's attention was
called to the paragraph on the subject
published in the APPEAL Wednesday
morning, and the question asked him if
the company had the charter right to ex-
clude the public from the use of the tracks
in front OF the elevator.
Taking up a copy of the second edition
of the Digest OF the Taxing-District Ordi-
nances, he called the APPEAL representa-
tive's attention to the following clause of
a paragraph in the contract" between the
city and the Elevator Company, in the
appendix, page 5:
And it may also construct side-tracks,
such as may be necessary or convenient
for its business, upon Promenade street,
at points from Winchester across Poplar,
Washington and Adams streets to Jeffer-
son street, and may leave cars standing for
the purpose of loading and unloading
upon that part of Promenade street here
by leased to it, provided the same does
not interfere with the rights of other par
ties having like privileges under contracts
with said first party 1.-THE Taxing-Dis-
~trictl."
iudi Jun 1 give US lllt TlRIl ~ tlldIEe
tolls" said MIR. Galloway, 81 don't know
what does. Now, l want to explain to
you" he continued, that our tracks are
free to the railroads and the public to do
business with the elevator, and we pro-
pose to make nominal charges only in
other cases where they are used for pri-
waite purposes"
rs it not possible for the clause referred
to being differently construed-that is,
cannot the parties complaining claim that
their rights are interlered with by you
closing the switches"
Il can't see how. And if they did, we
have another point in our favor perhaps
they have not considered. When the
building of the elevator was first contem-
plated the company secured the right of
way and privileges above referred to, but
on locating our ines we discovered that
the Mississippi and Tennessee railway had
previously been granted right of way
through Promenade street, and had To-
Gated their line in the center of the street,
leaving nc room for our tracks. The con-
sequence was we had to move the site of
the elevator westward about sixteen feet,
which extended our river front that dis
lance further into the river, and the track
over which all this dispute has beer
raised was located on our own leased
grounds, and in no way restricted by any
construction that could be placed upon
the clause in the contract"
'The Elevator Company leased the site
from whom"
Prom the eity-here's what we nave to
pay besides ~obligating ourselves to protect
the river front:
For lease of site, per annum ~~....--.---.s1000 90
FOR privilege 80 W
For State, county and city tax...---.--...-. 165 90
Total annual "
"For this mount we get only the privi-
lege OF occupying the ground on which the
elevator stands, without any favors shown
us by the Taxing-D District authorities. We
have no gas lamps, no walkways, no street
improvements, and what approaches to
the building we have were built with our
own money. Besides the above amount
the city realizes more wharfage from boats
doing business at the elevator than from
all the other portions of the wharf put to-
gether. Now, you have an idea of our po-
sition. The tracks are of steel rails, which
cost the company about $4,000, and are
subject 10 wear and tear, for which there
should be some return Resides this