Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-05-29

/ -. bOH'rs Aili-Dn AuultOu,
Gray, Charles 5. Crenshaw, for, &c.
OUTLINE OF THE ORDER.
The injunction q" enioins and restrains the
defendants, Mayor, Acting Mayor, City
Councilmen, officers OF the Electric Line
&C. and each and all Of them, their agents
or attorneys, from at all proceeding with
said proposed ordinance described In the
bill or any other ordinance granting or in
tended or purportIng 10 authorize or grant
TO the said Richmond Union Passenger. Rail.
way Company, or TO any other person oI
corporation. The right or privilege or power
TO extend its line down Seventeenth street &c
Cary street, thence up Cary street by single
track to Twelfth street, and thence out Cary
street westwardly by double track to It's
terminus. and from passing said ordinance,
| or approving the same II passed, and from
accepting and acting under said ordinance
II passed and approved, and from authori'
zing, or in any manner, by ordinance OF
contract or otherwise, granting TO said
Richmond Union Passenger-Rai Com
pany, or any other person or corporation,
the right, power, or privilege 10 lay a double
or single or any track, or erect any poles foT
a railway on said Cary street, and from ac-
cepting or acting under such grant, authori-
ty. or privilege n granted until the further
| order Ol the Court"
TIE ALLEGATIONS.
| The Injunction, which was granted by
! Judge W. A. Barton, Of Fredericksburg, SIT
| ting for Judge Holiday, natures on the Sd
| Monday in June. OF course the defendants
can move, with reasonable notice, to dissolve
1 the Injunction at any time, and II is very
! likely that the counsel for the Electric Line
will do this in day or two.
The grounds or which the injunction was
asked are mainly that such a use OF the street
would be a pery ersion from It's proper and
legitimate uses; that q street-car line, espe-
clay operated by that dangerous power
electricity. would amount to an exclusive
use OF the street by the line, and would drive
from the street lis trade and its present occu-
pants, because the street, particularly from
Twelfth TO Fourteenth streets, is exceeding
" narrow and already overlooking and
chOkcd with the traffic, heavy drays and
wagons running through il, and II the street.
car line were permitted TO run either the
line or the business would have to give
place.
The bin also alleges that the stretching OF
wires overhead would lie exceedingly dan
gerOus from possible accidents; that they
would interfere materially with the telephone
service; that they would interfere with the
tiremen in case Of dre in that locality; that
they would be a public nuisance; tnat great
haste has been exhibited in trying to con-
summate the passage OF the ordinance, IN the
face OF an expiring term OF cOunclnen, by
frequent meetings; that the Council are the
peoples trustees and should not grant what
the people do not want.
The plaintiffs were required 10 give bond
in the sum Of $4,000, which they did, with
Mcssrs. ". l.. Slater, +. \. saunders, and
Il. L. Brown as securities.
The Mayor, W. c. Darlington; Acting
Mayor, J.. l.. Bass, and each member OF the
Board Of Aldermen and Common Council
aud the Union Passenger. Railway Company
are made parties defendant TO the case.
The final purpose Of the injunction is to
perpctually epjOin all railway companies
from running line Of cars on the business
part Of Cary street.
Mes>rs. McGuire & Elicit are counsel for
the petitOners ana Mr. W. r. Meredith is
counsel for tue Union Line.
The Matter Before tho BOARD OF AL
dermCn.
A called meeting OF the Board OF Alder
men was held in the Council chamber last
night. Present: Messrs. Crenshaw, II ir.
grove, Powers, Crump, ChappelI, Murphy,
Noble, Hill, DickcTson, Snead, Bland, Davis,
Baheu, and Adams.
The body was called 10 order by Clerk Au.
gust, who stated that Mr. Bass. the presi-
lent. was i'll. and that the first business
in o.der would be the election OF temporary
chairman.
Mr. Ilill nominated Mr.. Crenshaw, and he
was elected.
The Clerk then read the order for the
meeting, which stated the special object Of
IT, He also read a letter from President
Bass, in which he had enclosed a notice Of
the Iojuuction. He was about to read the
notice, when Mr. Hill said:
"Mr. Chairman, | would like TO know il II
il In order TO consider the communication
first. In my opinion the first business is
the Navor's veto OF the ordinance granting
the Union Passenger. Railway Company per-
mission to extend ITS line up Cary street.
Would not that have precedence over any
new busine.si"
The Chair coucurred in this opinion.
Alr. Snead move we proceed to act on
the veto.
Agreed TO.
The Clerk then read the veto message OF
the Acting Mayor.
Mr.. Hill: | move that further action on
this matter be laid on the table.
The Chair inquired what matterf
Mr.. Hill: The veto.
A vote was taken and the motion was
agreed to.
The Clerk then took up the ordinance and
started to read tDat
Mr.. IIill: thought we had laid that on
the table.
The Chair said that only the veto had been
laid on the table.
Mr.. Hill: Then / move to lay the ordi.
nance on the table, too.
Mr.. Dickerson: | hope. Mr.. Chairman,
that that will be done, as have a resolution |
which want to offer and want TO ask that |
the City Attorney be heard on 1t.
The motion was adopted.
Mr. DickeTson then offered the following |
resolution:
Be it reSolued By The Board of Aldermen,
That the City Attorney be, and he is hereby. !
instructed TO file an answer on behalf OF this |
body and on behalf OF the individual men, |
bers thereof to the bill OF complaint fled !
this day in the Chancery Court of Rich !
mond in the suit OF sanders and others |
against the CITY OF Richmond, the Board OF |
Aldermen, the Richmond Union Passenger |
Railway Company, and others.
Mr. DlckeTsoL then moved that Mr.. Mere |
llth, City Attorney, be heard on the resolu-
lion. Agreed to.
TIE CITY ATTORNEY.
Mr.. Meredith rose and said he had heard
)f and seen the injunction papers in the af-
ternoon, and he explained them fully to the
Board. He thought the order had been
granted because Judge Barton was not city
udge and was not acquainted with the rules
II procedure In the city courts. 1t was Gus
oniary when such action was desired for the
Judge 10 send for counsel OF the defendants
md bear their side OF the case before acting.
IIt did not hesitate TO say, with all respect for
Judge Barton, that the Injunction hat been
improperly issued, and be believed that 1t
would be dissolved IN q few days. There
we're allegations contained in the bill that led
o the opinion that the Council was over
teppIng its powers in granting e street,
'alway the right 10 run tracks through the
treet., when, in fact, that rigbtwas given the
,ouucIl by the law, and the judiciary bad no
ig ht 10 interfere.
Mr.. Meredilh also spoke Of the result OF
uspending order in case the injunction was
dissolved. II counsel for the plaintiffs still
Wished 10 perpetuate the Injunction they
would move that the Judge issue suspend.
ng order, and II he did that The case IN all
probability would not come up for bearing