St. Paul daily globe., 1889-07-04
TALKED IT OVER.
The exclusive" Street Rail-
way Franchise Not SO
Very Exclusive.
This According to Judge
Shaw and Anderson, Doug
lass & Company.
It Is Very Exclusive Accord
ing to Lowry, Ko0n
Et Al.
The Arguments, Pro and Con,
to Which the Commit
tee Listened.

Douglass q Co. Owing to the meeting
of several other committees nothing
was done until 3 o'clock, when Chair
man Warren raped for order. Mes rs.
Anderson and Douglass, with Judge
Shaw. their attorney: President Lowry,
Vice President Goodrich and Judge
n. B. Koon. formed an interested
group, behind whom we're seated
the members of the committee
and the spectators. Mr.. Anderson
offered an amendment to include three
lines not mentioned in the ordinance.
Aid. BradiSh interpOSed that If this was
done it would amount to a substitute for
the ordinance, and no action could be
taken. At this Mr.. Anderson withdrew
the amendment. and Judge Shaw began
an address in behalf of the petitioners
for the franchise in much the same
strain as he would address jury. His
argument. as it might be called, was
divided into two branches. the
legal aspect and the question
of policy. AS the legality of
the councils right to pass the
ordinance will come before the courts
for settlement, its discussion was
waived, and the judge proceeded with
the question of policy. or what he
Assuming the council has the legal
right to grant the prayer OF the petl-
TONERS, ought it do SO?' was the query
he raised at the outset. He then took
up President LOWry'S communication
! to the council, and proceeded to COM
/ ment upon it. Mr.. Lowry says broadly
! the Minneapolis Street Railway COM
pany is entitled to preference in build
ing and operating street railways within
the limits. present and prospective, OF
the city of Minneapolis: because the
! street railway company has an ''eXclu-
! sive right which it will maintain and
| fight for, and if intertered with Will III
| VOlve the city in expense and damage.
! The anaconda is certainly to be
| commended for so frankly stating its
! length and the cOmprehensivenesS Of
| it's grip" added the judge, contem-
/ platively.
WHAT DOES MIR. LOWRY MEAN
when he saws that this col pOratiOn will
! involve the city in expense and damage.
! He is lawyer and has able counsel,
and knows if there is any litigation
| over this it will be between the street
railway company and the grantees of
| such new right when they attempt to
exercise it. Even if the city was COM
pelled to test this question itself, by
| proceedings in its own name in court,
and at its own sole expense, the city
! council could never Justify itself to the
people if it should tamely cOncede this
| enormous claim without struggle. 1t
could well afford to instruct its able
counsel to fight it to the last gasp.
These petitioners say TO the council,
/ ''Give us merely standing room by the
passage of this ordinance, which will
not cost the city dollar, and we will
undertake to defend the right which it
purpOrts to grant US against all comers
at our own risk and expense"
Here then, is an opportunity for this
city to have settled once and for all,
practically without cost or expense to
itself. a question OF vital Importance and
significance to the people Of this city,
now here and hereafter to come. The
council which granted this franchise to
the Minneapolis Street Railway COM
pany may fairly be presumed to have
had in mind the possible condition OF
! things which has now become fact,
! viz: That the course of time and rapid
| Improvement upon old methods, greatly
improved and superior methods of Oper-
ating street railways would be dis
covered: and that in limiting this
franchise to the street railway COM
panv in the way it did. 1t meant to re-
serve to the city the benefit of such
discoveries. Viewed from this stand
point. much of the adverse criticism
which a certain class of gentlemen have
heaped upon th = heads of that council
is deprived of its sting. They were not
| so unwise as these gentlemen would
] have US believe. 1t may become a
! question for the present council to
| seriously consider, whether it will DOW,
either actually or tacitly, surrender
| to this corporation the very rights of the
| people which that old council, with
! all its alleged unWiSdom. had foresight
| enough to perceive and preserve!
! If that old council had done what the
! Minneapolis Street railway claims that
| it did in the matter of giving to it eX
! elusive rights. and a monopoly of the
| street railway business in this city. un-
| der any and all circumstances, then in
! deed would it be open to all the hard
| things that have been said of it. But it
| did not do so. And it seems to us that
| the people may now well inquire
| whether the present council is now 60
| ing to do the thing which the old coun-
! ell did not do. and surrender the rights
which that council preserved.
Its PAST DEEDS"
Judge Shaw sarcastically alluded to
| Mr.. LOWry's claim that his corporation
! if not by contract. "by its past deeds. I"
! is entitled to preference to all corners.
| But what deeds? Does Mr.. Lowry eX-
! pect that anybody is going to believe
| that he has done anything more or
/ better than any other enteTprising and
| bold business man might have done?
! He has without doubt been very thrifty.
! But he will not stand up in the face of
! this people and pretend that he and
! his company have not received from the
city and people quid pro quo, and
more than EQuid pro que. for all
! that he or it has ever given. To be sure,
! in the successful prosecution of his
| business. he has conferred benefits upon
| the city and the people. This was a
! necessary consequence OF such success
! ful prosecution. A score or more of
other enterpTising ana successful man.
! ufacturerS and merchants might be
named, who have been for years prose-
| cutting each his own particular line of
business in this city, with a greater or
| less measure of success upon precisely
the same motives and with the same re-
| suits, both to themselves and
the city and people. Yet it has
never been heard that any of
them has supposed that on this ac-
count the city council OF the legislature
should give to him monopoly of his
| particular kind OF business. and say that
any other man who proposes to come to
! our gOodly city with a million or two of
dollars to invest in any such business,
at his own risk, should not be permitted
to do so because he would produce a
competition with the older citizen,
WHAT would be said if the Messrs. Pills
bury should claim that they were en-
titled over all cOmers to a monopoly of
the flour-manufacturiug business of the
city, and ask the city council either to
| legislate or refuse to legislate in such
way as to accomplish that end?
As to Mr.. LOWry's personal sacri-
| fee" the judge remarked that the sacri-
fees have evidently paid, since within
twenty-three years. mostly through this
very franchise, he has grown from a
wideawake. frank and generous, but
seedy, youth without dollar to be sew
| eral times millionaire.
1t would be too bad if Mr.. Lowry has
all these years been counting upon the
I eXcluSiVeneSS of his franchise as large