Wichita eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1886-1890, 1889-09-06

antly discuss and condemn the action OF
the eight members who voted for the ordl-
nance, we are not responsible Tor sucn
comparison.
Tie EAGLE reporter said in yesterday S
issue that 1.-The prevalent idea WAS that the
members of the council who supported the
ordinance acted under misapprehenslon
OF what the effect of the franchise tAus
granted would he"
All we have to say to this is, the mem
bers who supported the ordinance under
stood it clearly in all its bearings, and the
man who wrote the article Is the man
who is acting under misapprshenslon-
The article further says much might
be said why the matter IN Its pres,
ent shape IS unfair. UNJUST ana
Objectionable" Such language is intend
ed to prejudice and mislead the public
rather than to discuss the issue fairly aIo
inform the public.
The time has come now when neither
the public nor the Street Railway COM
pany can afford to deal in hints The COM
pany has asked a privilege promised them
when the storage battery section was ac
cepted in December, 1857. The council
said then give us road with storage bat
terry power. We want no poles. We know
it is not yet practicable, but we hope IL
may be soon, and II not we VIII then give
you license to put up the overhead WIRE
It is long since settled that SO Tar the
storage battery is a failure, ana we no"
believe with proper announcements we can
equip with overhead wire, and we come TO
the council and claim the promise and ask
the privilege of striking out the tour
words ''Other than overhead wire.
Shall we have it and try TO
have first class street railway within the
city and for the benefit of its citizens and
the enhancement Of their property.
Eight of the councilmen answer aIhrna-
lively and four answered negatively.
Eight OF the councilmen do not want 10
take the responsibility of defeating thls
great enterprise. and we venture the as
sertion that they will have less TO explain
at the next election than the four VINO are
willing to defeat this enterprise.
1t appears that the mayor Is more nuft
than anybody and has made conildanb
of everybody that he will exercise the veto
perrogative. We refused TO believe the
reports of the language he has used, but IL
comes to us on every hand that he asserts
that the passage of the ordinance ueprecl-
ateS his property $4,000. -
The extravaganza of this assertion Will
defeat It's power to do the mischief IN
tended, at least no thoughtful, FAIR
minded man will be influenced by such
declaration. The mayors paving tax on
his property if all paid down in cash
would not be one-twentieth of the amount
of damage he claims, and II 1t be as ne
asserts there is one question which 1alr-
minded man would ask, and it is would 1t
be right to put this burden upon the
street Car company, and there Is another
question which a sagaclous man would
ask: can the street car company bear Such
burden as this and is it policy to impose
burden that would crush the company,
and thus kill the goose which lays the
golden egg And now, at last, We have
got at the question which is being forced
upon us by public clamor-we mean
paving. We say again that
in the beginning it was no part
of the question. We knew the old ordln-
ance compelled us, at some future time, to
pave the street. We knew also that the
language Of the section was ambiguous
and Interpreted in different ways by differ
ent persons. The franchise committee of
the council knew this and sought to get
the company to adopt the councils inter
probation of it. We answered all the time;
We do not want to discuss it; it has moth
ing to do with this question. The ordin-
ance reads as it was written and passed by
a former council and approved by former
mayor. Give Us what you have promised
us-the right to equip our line with cleo
tricity; as you have the other lines, They
have at last given 10 to us by vote in the
conneil of s to +, and yet wanting the may
or's approval, which is threatened TO be
veto instead. And we viii say right here
if the mayor does not veto the bill the
street railway company will veto it. To be
entirely respectful and serious, the bill as
passed has so many riders and burdens,
some of which do not benefit the city and
yet burden the company, some OF which
were not even intended TO be an embarrass-
ment that the company cannot accept 1t
and in its present shape will not.
In 81 10 -hr
think the franchise worth millions, or
rather who pretend to think SO, for we
have invited not only the city council and
mayor, but prominent business men to ex-
anime our business and become convinced
that we could not bear any more burdens.
If these Jealous advocates for paving
have found the inspiration for this gener-
osity in the concealed belief that smebody
else was going TO furnish the money to
pave and improve their property, the illu-
sion might as we'll be dispelled at once.
1t has often been asserted that no city
had. granted a street car license without
provisions that the company should pave
its track. To this we answer that such
assertions are made by persons who want
the street Car companies TO pave In front
of such persons property, and is
entirely apart from any question of equity
or ability to bear such a burden.
The old practice of street car companies
paving between their rails, obtained when
all street cars were drawn By horses or
mules, and 1t was obviously proper the
street car company should provide the
pavement which they needed for their
own use, and which if furnished by the
city, the street car horses would never
wear out. 1t was soon learned chat street
car stock was valuable property and that
car franchises We're valuable property, for
which companies could well afford to pay
a bonus In some shape. some companies
were required to pave between tracks;
others between tracks and Ole foot outside
OF rails; others two feet outside, and some
were required TO pave from gutter to gut
ter. Others paid a certain bonus Oh the cars
used. and others a certain percentage of
the profits, while others paid lump sum,
often a very large one, say 500 900 annual
H. But all these payments were based upon
ability of the company so licensed TO make
such payments.
Il was share of their profits But the
road which paid Sl00. 600 annually into the
city treasury was not in Wellington, or
or hingman. nor even Ia Wich
ita And this is the mistake that our peo-
pie make. We might as well talk about
laying a given tax on a lot four miles
from the center Of Wichita because a like
tax was laid upon the same sized lot four
miles from the center of Chicago or Phiia-
delphia. This present street car company
was required by public clamor two years
and half ago to build a cable lire and
when told it would hot pay was gravely an
swered that it had paid IN Chicago and
san Francisco, and we were in danger of
an indignation meeting 70 compel US to
act IN the matter.
In answer to the assertion that all street
railroads are required 10 pave. Will say
that know Of many that are not required
to pave foot OF ground, nor TO pay any
tax or bear any burden and ! know
II no such roads - favored but would be /