The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-02-21
RAMS, HORN TANGLE.
Three Interests Represented in
a Conference.
WORKING IN SINUOUS CIRCLE.
The Committee of the Board OF Alder
men Listen to the Arguments
of Learned Counsel.
WORKING IN sINUoUs CIRCLE.

The adjourned conference between the COM
mittee OF the city council and the representa-
tives OF the railroads was resumed yesterday
afternoon at the city hall. Alderman Ingraham
presided, with Aldermen Pontius, Korn, Snyder
and Miller, Delegates Muldoon and Hanford,
John I. Mitchell, ir., l. A. Nadeau, Thomas R.
Shepard, Roger s. Greene and Orange Jacobs
present
Mr. Mitchell related the object of the meeting,
namely, to consider an ordinance which had
been before the council for nearly year. 1t is
request for the westerly thirty feet OF the
remaining easterly thirty-eight feet OF Railroad
avenue south. He went over the details of the
proposition, declaring that the Northern Pacific
railroad was willing to straghten out the rams
horn in consideration of being allowed to use a
straight line from the end of the Seattle, Lake
Shore & Eastern and of the Northern Pacific g.
Puget Sound Shore line He said it was entirely
matter between the Northern Pacific and the
city.
Roger s. Greene appeared on behalf OF Q num-
Der OF property owners along the rams horn.
1t had BEEN for years a perplexity and source of
trouble. Unless the questions affecting it were
decided 1t would be continual source Of ex-
pense.
Mr. Mitchell asked if the granting of this
franchise would affect the rights of the owners
along the rams horn,
MI Greene replied no, but he asked the COM
nittee not to take action in favor of the railroad
until the rams horn was Strengthened. lie
asked if Mr.. Mitchell thought tine proposed or
dinance would be effective in REIMBURSEMENT of
the rams horn on Railroad avenue. Mr..
Mitchell replied in the Affirmative, but Mr..
Greene said it only relinquished the tracks but
said nothing about its right-of-way, or the inter-
est it could surrender. Is there not evidence
that the city would be no better off? Is it not
true that the Northern Pacific merely promised
TO get off the tracks when it had other tracks?
He argued that no concession should be made
until the city in return received surrender
OF the rams horn, which had so
long perplexed the city and interfered
with every effort to bring railroad traffic
within such uniform arrangements as should
insure the best interests of the city and of the
railroads themselves. By standing firm the city
could now insure final settlement of this long
standing trouble.
Mr. Shepard said the Portland Puget Sound
the Union Pacific company's local Hne-had
spent 8, 600, 900 onthe road between Seattle aud
Portland. He now represented that company's
interest, together with the Seattle & Montana
road. He pointed out that by the terms OF the
ordinance the railroad company had string to
the rams horn and it did not have to relinquish
any part of the bow until the new track had
been laid, yet there was time fixed within
which the tracks must be laid. He went on to
the Northern Pacific was seeking franchise, TO
ask that railroad in return to reIinquish claim
which, if successfully maintained, would be a
calamity to the city. He urged that the matter
be left to the presidents OF the different roads to
settle, when. with map before them, they can
see the difficulty which is presented.
Nj. Mitchell made most earnest speech, in
which he declared that the city had promised to
give the Columbia & Puget sound right-of-
way on Railroad avenue in return for the rams
horn, but it had never done so, and yet it was
asked to surrender the only means by which the
road could go from south 10 north of the city.
Mr.. Shepard asked if the Northern Pacific did
not have the Seattle, Lake Shore & Eastern
road?
Mr. Mitchell replied that it was operating that
line only. and had no certainty of it. He said
the Seattle & Montana could carry all the traffic
from st. Paul TO Seattle on one track, and there
it Claimed to need four tracks The city had
never intended Railroad avenue to be a switch
ing place. If the city OF Seattle had kept faith
with the Columbia & Puget Sound railway
that line would be now on Railroad avenue and
there would be no rams horn. As it was, the
Northern Pacific was willing to put into any
words the council chose to dictate its sur
render of all the rights 1t had on the rams horn
south OF Yesler avenue This had nothing to
do with the northern end OF the horn which
was on land bought BY the railroad from prop
erty-owners who now sought to deprive the
company of the only value it had possessed
Yet he was authorized to say they would give
up the rams horn if the city would keep its
promise and give the company right-of-way on
Railroad avenue. If all the railroads which
had franchises on the avenue were built it
would be impossible to operate them
without the greatest danger to life
II the city would give the Northern
Pacific the same rights as others he would
guarantee that the matter would soon be
Strengthened out by the necessities of the rail-
roads ior mutual accommodation.
Mr.. Shepard said the Northern Pacific had
been offered room on the avenue with the other
roads, but the Seattle, Lake Shore & Eastern
had been most prompt to accept the offer and
got the easterly fourteen feet, and the Northern
Pacific would not take second choice.
The interest of the Seattle & Montana in abol.
ishing the rams horn was that it hoped to see
union depot built between Yeser avenue and
the next five or six streets TO the north.
Mr.. Greene again addressed the committee in
support OF the view that the city had an oppor-
tunity, which it should embrace, to get rid of
the rams horn.
The conference lasted over three hours, and
then was adjourned, the committee to report to
the board OF aldermen on Tuesday night