Sacramento daily record-union., 1890-09-07
TIE ELECTRIC RAILWAY.
THERE CAN BE NO REASONABLE OBJ
LECTION TO IT.
A Very Sensible and Conservative Com
munication Upon the Subject
Mr.. Hatfield's Views.

We cheerfully give place to the follow
ing communication on the subject which is
now engrossing public attention, almost to
the exclusion of all others, because it con-
tains some sensible and pertinent remarks.
We do not agree with the writer that it is
necessary to put into the proposed amend
ment anything about the roadway, as that
is entirely covered in the present franchise,
seems to have been overlooked by many
who have discussed the subject Such pro-
visions are all right, but they are already
in the franchise and the laws. As to
damages occasioned by the system the COM
pany is undoubtedly liable under the Codes
1t should be remembered that Section of
the franchise, which it is proposed to amend,
refers only TO the erection of the poles, and
also that it has been authoritively stated
that arrangements can and will be made
with the Electric Light Company to use its
poles as far as possible:
EDS. SUNDAY UNION: As the question of
street railway franchise is absorbing large
share of public attention, and being some
what interested in the future of this city,
will ask for little space in your paper to
give publicity to my views on the subject.
l was out of the city on Thursday even
ing, and therefore unable to attend the
meeting of citizens.
l presume it will be admitted on all sides
that the Mayor and Trustees are the agents
of the people, and that as such agents they
should give heed to the legitimate requests
of the people.
1t seems the whole contention arises over
the propriety of permitting the erection
and maintaining of poles along, and wires
over, some of the streets.
In my opinion, it would require one with
fine sense of discrimination to decide in
what manner the proposed addition of
poles and wire would affect the appearance
of street, and in the matter of convenience.
or inconvenience. the only substantial OBJ
lection ever made to overhead wires has
been occasioned by probable interference
with portable fire escapes and fire extin-
gushing apparatus.
That objection cannot be urged in this
instance, for the class of buildings now in
existence on ] and the other streets do not
demand such fire extinguishiDg apparatus
as would be in any way hampered with
overhead wires.
This, then, leaves only the matter of ap-
pearance to be considered, and if another
wire or two will disfigure street to an ex-
tent that will not be more than compen-
sated for by the improvement in transpor-
tation, it is time to call a halt all around.
In my opinion, the important feature to
be guarded against is the roadway. There
is where other cities. and this one, too,
have had their principal, if not only,
trouble.
There is no force in the objection to
poles and overhead wires from any stand
point other than as above, and as this is an
age of improvement, the probabilities are
hundred to one that in less than five years,
the life of an ordinary set of poles, there
will be such improvement in electrical de-
vices, that the overhead system will be
abolished as obsolete and extravagant.
1t is clear proposition that after the
electric forces are generated that every
penny added to the expense of utilizing it
is dead loss. 1t is also clear that the
poles, the erection and maintenance
thereof, and the wires exposed to the ele-
meats are constant source of expense.
Therefore it stands to reason that the COM
pany will be much more desirous than
anyone else to secure that system that will
do away with poles, trolleys, etc., at the
CdiiiCot luouuCAtt du0 t1C POWCi onh
cars as close together as possible.
1t is also a self.evident business propo.
sition that the street railway people are as
much interested in the growth and pros
perity of this city as anyone else. The in
crease and profit of their business depends
upon the growth of the city. and, while
they might lose sight of the future by some
apparently present advantage, it is not
reasonable to believe that they have not
gone over the whole matter.
There certainly ought to be no trouble in
providing suitable safeguards for the mod
iication or removal of the overhead sys-
tenn whenever state of affairs shall arise
which will demand it. Such, for instance,
as the erection of large per cent. of high
buildings, or the acquisition of a popula-
ton of 100000 people, or some other limita-
ton that will give a fair opportunity for
the development of the system and the ar
rival of a time, If is possible for II to
come, when there will be substantial
reason for the modification or removal.
Put in strong clause that the street rail-
way company shall in constructing new
lines do so with as little disturbance bf the
surface of the street as possible, and that
they will maintain the standard of roadway
required by the city, and such as the city
itself puts in and maintains along the sides
of their tracks, and that the company shall
be liable for all damages occasiened by the
use of their system, and make that pro-
vision as binding as possible and the people
OF this city will be satisfied.
Some lawyer may raise question as to
the legal effect of the last proposition, but
it will undoubtedly simplify matters very
much and put the liability out of the realm
of doubt.
do not. and large number Of people in
this city do not agree that the conduct of
the Trustees is the result of anything else
than a desire to do that which is for the
best interests of the city.
1t is much easier to criticise than to act,
and the critic who has no part in the re-
sponsipilily sometimes is hasty in his con-
clusions, not to say unjust. 1t is more busi-
ness-like and fair to offer amendments
than abuse. Respectfully,
L. T. HATFIELD,
Sacramento, September 6, 1890.