Wichita eagle., 1886-11-21
OUR STREET RAILWAY.
The Art OF interviewing. It's Uses and
Abuses.-The Right Of Petition and
it's PerverSiOn.
To the Editor OF the Eagle.

public method of discussing public ques
ton much more likely to lead to correct
conclusions than the circulation Of petl
lions and remonstrances, or the still more
questionable plan of interviewing, which
is at best but an ex parte presentation OF
the case. 1t is now four weeks since you
published letter giving my reasons why
it was neither right nor expedient at pres
ent for Wichita to destroy the property OF
the old street car company, TO make room
for something untried. and at present i'm
practicable | have seen no attempt to
answer the argument offered in that letter
in any public manner, nor indeed, at all,
unless the interviews" in the Beacon were
intended to be such an answer. Let us see
how far these interviews were an answer to
anything, or to what extent they reflected
public or even individual opinions. A report
approaches person absorbed in his own
business and asks hurridly if he is not in
favor of q motor street Railroads.&c. if a body
would move at all without motor. Ii
there is any hesitation in the answer, he
changes the question thus: care you not
in favor of rapid transit on our streets 2
IF the sufferer seems inclined to be reflcc-
tive and hesitates as if he would like to
qualify his answer, another change Is made
thus: do you not own real estate III
Wichita?" Now we know we have struck
the chord, for who is not proud to answer
this question afIirmativelY. He has got
his answer at last, and as the lawyers
would say, he has now foundation on
which to build, and the pOstulatc to the
foregoing follows in quick succession.
do YOU not want your real estate to in
croase in value?" 1t does not take an lend
man" to guess the answer. And now comes
the objective question of the whole
interview Are you not IN
favor OF rapid transit on our streets?
WHY not ask him if he does not know that
wheat bread is good for mainland if he
says yes, ask him then If he is not in favor
of flour. His affirmative answer would
hardly Justify one in confscating all the
present system of -four making in Wichita
for some untried patent scheme. Now
there are exactly Tic same number of men
In Wichita who are in favor of rapid tran
sit on the streets as those in favor of wheat
bread OF course the cases are not exactly
parallel, but TO show the difference involves
repetition Of the argument used in my
former letter. II we were permitted we
would give an instance by name, Of an in
tcrvicw published in this connection; but it
is enough to say that prominent business
man in connection with others who own a
:, valuable piece Of suburban property, set
about building a rapid transit line to the
same. al the gentleman alluded to made a
trip to Denver to investigate the workings
Of this SYSTEM in operation there. The gen
tlcman returned and reported to his com
pany that he did not believe any motor had
vet been discovered that would supersede
the use Of horses in Wichita at present.
This is exactly the language we have used
ourselves, and yet this gentleman appears
in the list Of witnesses in the Beacon. to
prove that rapid transit is dcSirabc-in
other words. that wheat bread is good for
man.
will repeat We want rapid transit on
our streets. | want it, Maj. Powell wants
it, all our stock holders want.it We all
own real estate and we want its value en-
HANGED, and our offer Of $4,000 still stands
on the EAGLE file and the money is still
ready Remember the offer is clear
bonus, and we expect 10 pay for the ma
chinery and fixtures besides.
Now a word in regard to the petition
which is to be presented to the council at
its next meeting Much that has been
said Of the methods of making interviews
applies to the manner Of obtaining sigma
tures to petitions \ man crowded and
preached with paper to sign-only his
name is wanted, TO something which costs
him nothing, and which will add greatly
to his wealth and comfort-a rapid transit
street railroad He seZes the pen and
writes his name in some cases 10 get rid of
his visitor. in others because pleasant
thoughts have been suggested 10y the request
Not one in hundred Of the subscribers
sign the petition for the reasons which will
he given to The council by the attorney who
will present il, not one in hundred has
made the question 4 study or know any
thing Of mechanical motors for propclIing
street cars, anything Of the cost of such
system, nor what the earnings would be-
Not one Of these subjects is discusSed-the
name only is asked To influence the council
to pass an ordinance and all things shall be
added thereto. And least Of al are the
rights of the old company ever discussed,
or the moral obligation Of the city to keep
its pledges.
The fact is, this petition which shall be
urged as the voice Of the people, represents
nobody but the parties who wrote it, and
net even this, for the application SAYS
one thing while the applicant means
quite another 1t is scheme Of suburban
property owners to make buyers believe
that outside property Is inside property;
that by an ordinance of the council grant
ing right TO build rapid transit railroad.
an increased value to their property would
be assured. Now would it not lie wiser
for all nronerty holders both outside and