St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1888-07-11

COl. DdVlQSOn briefly feIPrfeQ 10
the legal phase, reoding a section from
the consolidated statutes that cover the
point, and then proceeded to argue why
rapid transit was necessary in st. Paul.
lie wanted st. Paul to be supplied with
all such modern improvements, because
on these depended the future of the
city. He spoke for some time, and
urged several reasons why the city
should take advantage of this chance of
securing an elevated railway.
Mr.. Gilman, representing the Thorn
Son-HouStOn Electric company, was
given chance to answer the questions,
''HaS the company any money!" lis it
an experiment." He said that the COM
pany was a wealthy corporation that
had a paid-up capital of $l,000,0t0 and
had already invested s25, OOO,OOO in cleo
trio railways in this country. 1t was
not an experiment. What was built in
South st. Paul was hastily put up, but
was nothing compared with what the
road would be. Electric railways had
been placed in several cities and there
were some Southern cities where cleo ric
roads alone were used. The road, if
built, would be found to benefit st. Paul
and make the Twin Cities in reality
what they
NOW ARE IN NAME.
This concluded the speaking, and the
ordinance was taken up section by sec
ton, some amendments adding to the
stringency of the ordinance being made.
70 section Ii the following amendment
was offered:
By adding. but said Enos Electric Rail-
way company, its successors or assigns. shall
not use or occupy any of said Streets or any
part thereof, in any manner or to any ex-
tent. either in the constructing its railway
1DDIlftpnlNrpS thereof.
IN operating the same or otherwise howso-
ever until il has obtained the right SO to do
as aforesaid from the abutting property
owners, either by purchase or conveyance, or
III cases of condemnation by payment in
cash OF the amount finally ascertained to the
owner entitled thereto, or by depositing in
the proper court for his use when such de-
post is allowed by law.
Aid. Sanborn said that the
amendment positively killed the ordi-
nance. After every possible precau-
ton had been taken to draw up the Or
dinance to protect the property
owners. the amendment was offered.
The company might secure the
absolute right from the GLOBE
building to the west city limits, and
from the river to the extremity of the
line III South St. Paul, but if one prop
erty owner between the GLOBE build
ing and the river could not be satisfied,
the company could not put a spade in
the ground. 1t was impossible to pay
man damages until they could deter
mined what the damages were. He pro-
ceeded to make a strong appeal to the
council to vote down the amendment
and in favor of the franchise generally.
On vote being taken the amendment
was lost by vote of IL to 5.
When the ordinance came up for
final passage Aid. Melady moved that
the matter be laid over for three weeks
to give the property owners
A CHANCE TO BE HEARD.
Aid. Kavanagh seconded the motion.
He was opposed to rushing it through,
besides he was opposed to its running
on WabaSha street at all. 1t would
injure property from the bridge
thoroughfare to the north city limits.
There was a way of getting line by
running up Third street and thence out
that way. Besides, this was an expert
ment anyway and he was not sure it
would be benefit to st. Paul.
Aid. SanbOrn explained that the COM
mittee had given the property owners
every chance to be heard and had
framed the ordinance as much in ac-
cOrdance with their wishes as possible.
The ordinance, however, was put on its
final passage and was lost, thirteen
votes being required for passage, while
but ten were cast. The vote was:
Yeas-Messrs. Blom, Hamm, Lett
hauser, Minea, Pratt, Sanborn, Sulli-
van, Weber, YOerg, Cullen-10.
Nays-Messrs. Book, Fisher, Gehan,
Kavanagh. Melady, Bickel-5.
The vote was re-considered and the
further consideration, on motion of
Aid. SanbOrn, was laid over to the first
meeting in August.