Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1893-01-07

and not for the purpose OF carelessly
| spending money or of wantonly injuring
| private Interests. On this point, Judge
| Jacob said so far from desiring to inJure
anyone, the Company desired to benefit
all, realizing that whatever benefited
the city and citizens would tend to ulti-
| mately benefit the Company. Judge
| Jacob said ii was true the street was
! narrow Just below Forty-thlrd
street, but it was not so bad
as in other cities, no.
tably in our neighboring city OF Pitts
| burg. where there were double tracks
on streets not so wide as Jacob street,
and where more vehicles passed a given
point in an hour than passed over jacob
street in day. People in modern cities
accommodated themselves TO the sltua-
ton, and got along all right. Judge
jacob instanced the opposition, at first,
to the building OF the motor track on
| Sixteenth street, it being alleged that
all sorts of harm would result, but aft
err some litigation the Railway Company
won, the track was built, and it harmed
no one, but was, on the other hand, a
| great benefit to the public. The Judge
| then went into history OF the
controversy, narrating the facts
in detail from its inception down
10 the present time, and showing
the B. P. W., which Mr.. Howard now
claims had no authority, had examined
| into the matter ct MIR. Towards solicit
| tation. and as result Of that examina-
ton had allowed the Company to go on
with the work. The Judge held that it
was with the B. p. w. TO say when
switches should be laid, and 1t was In
| this view that the Board had acted
| Before the Board Mr.. Howard had said
| someone must determine when and how
! these switches should be laid down, and
| he was anxious TO have the Board act.
When it did act, he complains OF the
Boards lack OF authority. The
Judge quoted the ordinances grant
| ing the franchise TO the Railway
companies, showing that the Company
had the right to construct such switch
es las may be required for the business
of the Company" and asked who was TO
| decide what was required for the ousl-
| ness Of the Company-a committee OF
Council or the Company? The ordi-
nance further said the work was TO be
done to the satisfaction OF the B. 2. W.,
hut went no further If there was any
thing at all in Mr.. Towards argument,
| it was simply that the existing switch
was too long. He hardly thought Mr..
Howard was competent railway man.
Judge Jacob said he didn't know how
! long the switch ought to be, and he felt
sure Mr.. Howard didn't know, either.
He closed by asking that no action be
taken by the Committee, as the
affair was In the control
OF the B. P. w. He said, suppose you
should adopt Mr.. Towards wish and
recommended that the rails be taken
up, and suppose Council adopt 1T?
Would that take up the rails or change
the curvesP think not. This Is not a
| judicial body"
MIR. Howard replied generally, and In
| the course of his remarks said that II IT
could not be shown that the Compa ny
could get along as well without the
| double track between Forty-Thlrd
street, as with it, the petitioners would
not be where they are, for they desired
10 lUlDOSb llU Oh OhC
neither did they desire to embarrass the
Company in any unnecessary way. On
| the point of the length OF the double
track, Mr.. Howard said it was just as
damaging to the petitioners wlthln tne
two hundred feet as though
II extended from one end Of the city TO
another; it was laid down without
authority, and Council was
not bound by the negligence OF the Is.
p. W., nor was Council to sit idly by
forever because the Board allowed
something to be done which could not
have been lawfully done. The b. Z.
w. did not pass ordinances; it ooeYed
them, as made by Council. Mr.. Howard
submitted resolution embodying the
things asked for, to which Judge ia
cobs objected.
The Committee then went into execu-
tive session, and Mr., Riley was asked
for his opinion as to the rights of the
city and the Company. Before the
opinion was read, however, Mr.. Craig
offered the resolution prepared by MIR.
| Howard requiring the Company to take
ND the two tracks below Forty-third
street and In their stead to put down
one track in the center OF the street, and
in the failure OF the Company to take W
the tracks, then the B. ?. w. to take
them up, and the police to give them
all necessary aid. Mr.. Riley then mar
ranted the substance of the ordinances
relating to the Railway Companies, and
said the two questions OF fact were,
first, was switch necessary at that
point, and second, was the switch long
err than necessary? The Company had
decided it needed the switch, and Its
length, and it was for the Committee
and Council to reach a conclusion either
in opposition on in harmony with the
conclusion Of the Company. That woulc
make up the issue, If the city and Com
pany differed. The Company bad the
right to lay necessary switches, and the
necessity was the point at issue, both a:
to the location and extent. II the city
could show that one locality was baC
one and that another would do as well
then the city had the right to interfere
The right existed to put in necessar!
switch, if the necessity was fully es
tablished.
After a long discussion the Commit
tee. at 1920 O'Clock, adopted the resou
tion submitted by Mr.. Howard, excep
that portion relating to aid from thu
H..