Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1885-09-27
RAILROAD MEETING.
hapsy Termfnat.en Of the Gathertag
al ftfssviiie-The Puxet sssnd
shore kead 20 be 0per.
nteA af Aaee

terday at Titusville TO discuss the bes
ways aud means for securing the oper
ing and operation of the Poget Som
Shore Railroad. The essembIage me
IL Good Iempiars' Hall, and the aud
ence vas composed of a Roodly repr.
sentation Of citizens from White rive,
Green river. Puy sllup and Seattle, ~ hos
very great interest IL To have put il
operation the railroad for whose cor
strnetien tbey freely granted the righ
OF way. Among the audience wa
noticed the following gentlemen
from Seattle: Hons. j. X. Lewis, q
jacobs, G. L. hunday ard J. H. klnnear
mem bers elect of the Legislature. vh
were especially invited to addres
the farmers and discuss the ques,iol
at Issus; also Proc scutiRg Attorney J
j. Ronald. Treasurer George ID
HILL, q. Davies. Sheriff ]. II. Nc
Graw, DIR. q. A. Weed, City Attorney G
n. Hanford, Mr.. James McSauqht ans
Mr.. John l. Howard. The meeting wa
called to order by Mr.. Erastus Green
and n. ii. Martin, Jr., acting as scre
tary, read the call, after which Mr.
Orr 1n announced that the Opening re
marks would be made by Judge Lewis
Who would be followed In regular ordel
by Me-srs. McNauQht, Hanford, How
ard and Jacobs.
Judge Lewis began his remarks b,
scverting to the great good resuitinl
from concentrated effort upon a practi
cal idea, and the beneficial results TO bs
exI scted from earnest work and dis
cussion. Referring 10 what he termed
the Seattle or King Q unity idea" re
RardiBg the unearned land grant for
feiture, he was happy to point to the
fact that IL bad finally been adopted Al
part Of the policy of the AdminIstra-
ton at present entrusted With the gov.
erDment of this Nation. he then pro
oeeded TO read a well written opinion
upon the rig hts, duties and obligations OF
railroad corporations, claiming that
their mere existence was for the public
good, and that was the sole object OF
their creation. They were ordained
with great powers, and in having what
Is legally termed the right of eminent
domain thsy were given part Of the
sovereign power. He then defined With
great clesrness that the right Of emf
nept domain was the right or pJwer
given to railroad corporation to ap
proptiate private property for the pab-
lie good, and quoted from several an
hand, that the dominant idea running
through the corporate powers and fran
chises vas that Of public use and bene
6t. Having treated this phase Of the
subject at considerable length, he
pointed to the fact that the Puget
Sonnd Shore Railroad had not complied
With the contract which was made with
the farmers who had decided land for
It's right of way, whether II was implied
or expressed in such deeds that rail
road shoaid not only be built but should
also be operated. 10 the complications
of the Willard companies he was at a
loss TO locate the responsibility for its
non operation, bat from his study of
the question he could easily see that
every interest, either directly or indi-
rectly conns nsoted, would be bsne6tted-
exc ptinR perhaps the town Of Tacoma,
where Mr.. @. B. Wright was said TO
have an investment of $20C0.000 IN
town lots, snd be had good reason 70
believe that SO long as Mr.. Wright could
the power he had succeeded
ia welding, % long the road in ques-
i'm would remain in idleuess, and be
didn't know that he was blameable, IL
Mr.. Wrleht's opinion was correct that
the operation OF the road would praeti-
caily make Seattle the real termi sus Of
the Northern Pacific R,ilroad, and
ihereby rob the legal terminus OF por-
ton Of its glory.
Judge Lewis then gave the opinion
that under the law as IL stands the az
Rrieved parties could apply to court of
fquity for writ Of quo vArranto or a
under which the owners OF
the franchise and road could be com-
PEELED to operate II. and he had con
,luded that II there was any doubt upon
this psint it Was possible TO effect suca
at the coming session as
would. in such cases, enable the courts
10 appoint q commission to take charge
of and condemn for public use any rail
road, after adiadicating a forfeiture of
The csmpany's franchise for non
ases. and to sell or lease such road on
that the purchaser or lessee
should operate the same; and that such
legislation would not be open TO an at
lack of unconstitutionaiity, as was the
Mr. McNaneht, attorney for the North
srn Pacific Railroad Company, then fol
lowed, paying his respects with some
feeling to the legal points advanced by
Judae Lewis. and by an application OF
lhe monkey and parrot story intimated
that by any process Of law or equity il
would be difficult 20 eaforce the opera
lion of a nsn-used road that was with
out money, without motive power or
rolling stock, and which, under the pc
ruliar circu instances in this case, would
only involve a money loss TO its owners.
tie then detailed the history of the en-
terpsise, and Of the various neRotiations
between the Northern Pacific Railroad
aud the Oregon a Trsnscontinental
locking 10 the use Of the
road. all of which had. up to the pres
rnt, failed Of success, bat that when IN
St. Paul recently he was present at q
discussion of the question, which Vas
to have been resumed In Nes YORK, and
he had rsasou 10 hope that favorable
decision betvees the companies in
volved would very shortly Be reached.
Mr.. McNaucht then adverted with
considerable warmth 20 the Seattle
Ides,- and said that 10 was pointed at
a being responsible for . decrease Of
"a .Op. CO in the assessment roll Of King
county; that growing out Of the faI-
nination OF the Seattle idea we're the
teusn,less homes. the decreased rent
rslls and an increase in the interest rate
frem 10 per cent per annum 90 IN per
sent ger month. be bad never heard .
Northern Pacific Railroad ofactal deny
The propriety or necessity Of operating
the Shore road, nut be felt sure that
the Seattle idea, which vas the cry OF
had forfeited for the town
cf seattle the Favorable consideration
OF the Norshern Pacifio Railroad, vish
the depiogAbl results before mentioned.
Mr.. Hanford followed. rsGrestirg that
the audiense had not been served With
more acceptable and Substantial pab
uluu from Mr.. AcNas9hG He bad
gives the question considerable thought.
and in the absence of better and more
complete argument be vas compelled to
adopt the legal views of the case %
clearly presented BY Judge Lewis. No
one desired 10 pres upon the mind at
the people the necessity OF adverse
against railroads - they
wanted them for The development OF
the country; bot the eommunity had
noshius 10 do vith the dissxresmsats Of
corrorasic ne regarding the opssstaoa Of
this road. What 10 wanted vas that the
railroad should serve the purposes Of