Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-08-05
BUENA VISTA STREET AGAIN.
Let Facts He Proven Before Decid'
ing the Question.


ing the Question.
EDITORS HERALD-Should the City
Council allow electric cars to run on Bu-
ena Vista street from the High bridge
into the heart of the city, or should they
protect the safety and convenience and
necessities of large portion of the peo-
pie of the city and of the adjacent coun-
try by requiring horsepower to be used
on that part of the proposed railroad
from Pasadena? This is serious ques-
ton and should not be hastily decided,
or decided at all in favor of this new mo-
tor without satisfactory proof of its noise
less and innocent character as claimed
by it's advocate, "Buena Vista" We all
admit that this street is now the only
safe avenue for wagons and other vehi-
cles to get out of or into this city on the
northeast. We all know that the ap-
proach to the bridge is along
comparatively narrow, curved roadway
with high steep hill on one side and a
precipice on the other. Now it requires
no argument to prove that strange look
ing, buzzing motor meeting team in
this place would probable cause
catastrophe to life, limb and property.
If this is not true, and will not be true of
the proposed electric motor, let the pro-
ponents prove it to the satisfaction of the
public and of the Council by ocular
demonstration before placing what would
appear to be such a dangerous and
destructive nuisance upon our central
streets. If the thing then proves to be
"noiseless and innocent" this citizen,
and probably all good citizens, will ad-
vocate rather than protest against it.
But another writer over the signature
OF Public Convenience" in your issue
of August I'd advocates this electric mo-
tor on a bolder and perhaps a truer
groun than did his friend of the "noise-
less and innocent" persuasion. He
thinks it is matter OF little concern if
the new motors do drive the "green"
teams and horses that are OF broken of
their fears from this, their only
avenue to and from the city, and urges
that the great majority of the
car-riding public is more to
be considered than the minor
ity who use teams. If that argument is
good for anything it is good for all lowing
steam locomotives through all the streets
in the city. 1t raises supposition that
the electric motor is not so noiseless and
innocent as its other advocate suggests
Now, my idea of true "public con-
venience" is that which serves the con-
venience of both the majority and the
minority Of the public. Ii horse cars are
used on that portion of the street in
question, as 1 suggest, then the convent
ence and safety of both the majority and
the minority above referred to would be
secured. Otherwise the interest and
convenience of the minority, which is a
large portion Of the public, will be sacri-
feed, and the fine, useful, necessary and
beautiful avenue in question will be
nearly destroyed so far as its present
uses and the purposes for which it was
designed and for which the high bridge
at its terminus was constructed.
In conclusion 1. would say that no one
favors advanced and progressive i'm
provements more that do. But deem
it unwise and unjust to jeopardize, in
jure or destroy Improvements and con-
veniences we now have and know, for
the purpose of substituting an uncertain
experiment. All 1 ask is that before
allowing the electric motor in question,
the Council shall require satisfactory
proof that is what its proponents claim
for it. CITIZEN.