The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1889-10-03
THE CROOKED ROUTE.
Railway Companies Want Old
Rightsof- Way.
aAllaoAD AVENUE REJECTED.
4, E9syf NsA~ by Two Roads ss have
TIE Coiumhss street 1ntzsesfou
Dfssofsed.


Th~ rsotson 10 dissolve the temporary tn
tsrnefscn GRANTED the city IN The cases
trn,xAt against the Columbia e. Puget
so,.r.d and The Puget sound Shore Rail
road Companies % restrain them from
crossing Columbia street at the lsvs! 81
fhesr ola rosdway. ~xs argued ~ night
s.s~son Of the district co1rt last night By
Nsscasfe 4 B1rieigh on the part Of The
Puget SQUAD shore Company and by City
Assornsy X. b. Arhertsoa on the part Of the
e1sy. The case presented upon the plead
inSs and the affsasvsts vas IS foglows:
In 1875 the portion of Columbia street
concerned Wa dedicated 10 the cItT by TIE
owners Of the property by the rias
OF Teryy's third addition. la iss2
the city council passed an ordinance grant
ing the right Of way 70 the Defendant
companies along The water front OF the city,
~ far north "a Wster street.
The IRE Of June destroyed all OF the
track and other Improvements constructed
along this right Of way By the companies
north OF Yesser avenue. After the TIRE Rail
road syenne was established by the city az
part Of the general plan 81 street inn
rfoyements within the burnt district The
complaint and asadsyits on behalf OF the
city set forth thai the plan OF Railroad Az
emue was agreed upon both by the eity and
the different railroad companies,
and that all of the railroad
companies. including the Seattle, Lake
shore * Eastern, agreed 10 aceept the fran
chise over Railroad avenue, IS newly essah-
fshed. in lieu of the rights claimed by
thena under former franchises granted by
the city. In the latter part Of June, before
any part OF the roadway Of tire defendant
companies had been reconstructed, the city
passed an ordinance eleyating the grade of
Columbia street two and one-hali feet
higher AZ the point previously crossed by
the tracks than the old level that this ordi-
nance Was passed with the fun
knowledge of the defendant com
rsnies and no protest was ever
made BY them against the ordinance,
and that prior 10 the granting of the tenn
porsry restraining order in the case, Co
Iumhia street had been actually constructed
ia accordance with tho new grade along
the section formerly crossed by the railroad
tracks.
IL Was claimed before the court by the
defendant companies that inasmucb as
the ordinance of is.e had granted them a
franchise along the water front at the COM
half feet below the new grade of Columbia
street, that the city had no power TO raise
the grade: that the franchise was an ire
vocAbie contract and that the passage OF
the new ordinance would render IL impossi-
bic for the companies 10 rebuild at their
old grade and hence was unconstitutional,
o. impairing the validity of a contract.
II was contended i'm behalf OF the city
hat hA yir s.f ia. -.
public necessities In an inherent power of
. municipal government and that the
franchise claimed by the companies was
subject to the exercise of this power; that
II the defendant companies were damaged
In consequence, section 100 Of the city
charter provided . method of compensation
for such damages, and that this was the
only remedy the defendants could pursue
in any event. 1t was further eontended by
the city that by reason of the
agreement made by the rail-
road companies - to the acceptance OF
franchise over new Railroad avenue and
by reason Of the failure OF the defendants
TO protest in any way against the passage
OF the new grade ordinance until after the
street was actually constructed in accord
ance with the grade, they were estopped
from denying the right of the city to main
tain the street as constructed.
IL was further shown that the right-of-
way formerly claimed by the defendants
ran obliquely through lots and bloc 4,
greatly TO the Disagreement and damage
of the intervening property: that the grade
OF Columbia street Is formerly established
west OF Front street was SO steep as To rem
der the hauling OF heavy loads up the same
very difficult, that this section of Columbia
street has become one OF the principal bus
mess thoroughfares of the city--that large
warehouses and other buildings have been
constructed along this section OF the street.
some Ut them with reference so the new
grade and that the new grade Is very much
easier, and is rendered q public necessity
by reason of the immense traffic done over
IL With teams.
The court took the matter under advise
msnt and will probably render decision
Friday morning. The companies have al
ready reconstructed their road on the old
level as faF as the south line of Columbia
street, and admit in their answer that un-
less restrained by the court. they will re-
build at The former level along the whole
line OF their old rightoi-way. 4
number OF warehouses have nj.
ready been partially constructed along
the rsght-of-way. aud their owners are
awaiting with much concern the decision
OF the court, IS upon il viii depend their
right 10 complete these buildings.
The city council is willing 10 grant the
defendant companies righs-of-wav along
Railroad avenue instead Of their present
road. in accordance with the original un.
derstanding; but the defendant companies
now claim that The bailding Of roadway
ever the deep water OF Railroad avenue
would involve an expense too large for
them to incur under the present conditions.