St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-04-09
the lines to come down town and return
again to their homes
For One Fare

-
He cited as instances where this plan
might be worked the lines running on
West Seventh, Rice, Maria and Concord
streets. Mr.. Zimmerman said this mat
ter could be easily remedied by the
company issuing instructions to the
conductors. Mr.. Mum said it was not
q question of instruction, but one Of
legal right. If the company acl
cepted the ordinance and one Of the
provisions was that transfers were good
on all lines the company could not disI
criminate, but would have to issue them
or stand suit. The courts would hold
that the provision meant just what ii
said, and the company would have to so
do. The Lightner ordinance. Mr. Mum
SAID, had the provision about returning
the passenger to or near the point from
which he started in it, but in the ordi.
nance presented it was eliminated
This was done, Mr.. Phillips said, at the
request of the committee. Mr.. Cope
land said the committee had given tha
matter deal of attention and had de-
cided that it would be IN the best
interests of the public to Strike out
that part Of the section which Mrs.
Mum had spoken about. He did not
agree with Mr.. Mum that 80 per cent
of the passengers would take advantage
of the proposed transfer Syste IN to beat
the railway company. Mr.. Mum ex-
planned that he did not say so per
cent would, but that they might do so.
Mr.. Mum had hardly ceased speaking
when Mr.. Zimmerman arose and SAID
he desired to take exceptions to the
statements of Mr.. Mum that so per
cent of the passengers would try to beat
tine railway company. Again Mr.. Mum
explained, and this time with more feel.
ing, that he did not say they would try,
to, but that under the ordinance they
might.
Being asked to state further the OBJ
jections of the company to the ordinance
Mr.. Mum said the first section con-
tanned another serious one. One pro-
vision read that no transfers should be-
issued to or from the interurban line,'
while another read that unless local.
cars were run every ten minutes, trahSS
fers would be good on the line the same
as on other lines in the city. These two
provisions, he said, /
Destroyed Each Other
for the reason that if cars were not run
as provided, through transfers would
be good on the line. The boulevard
section. making the boulevard open at
nearly every street crossing, was am
other objection. In answer to Ques-
ton by Mr.. Cullen. he said the boule-.
ward was both q concession and demand.
The object was to give rapid transit be-
tween the two cities. The company also
objected to the council ordering the cars
to he stopped on the interurban line al
each street if they so desired. The sixth
section, which provided for the
transfers on the interurban line
not being abolished until all
the new lines had been COM
pleted, Mr.. Mum said was very OBJ
jectionabIe. The ordinance had a for
feiture clause which was neither fair
nor legal. Suppose, said Mr.. Num-
that the company go on and complete
the line, and make arrangements with
the North st. Paul company to run to
the harvester works. Then If the
North st. Paul company should default
on their contract the street railway com-,'
panV would forfeit the franchise. There
were half dozen other legal objections
to the ordinance, Mr.. Mum SAID, but
he would not take up the time by nam.
ing them. Mr.. Cullen raised the point
that under ordinance 1918 the company
were obliged to build the boulevard on
University avenue. Mr.. Mum said this
ordinance had been rendered inOperL
ative by the passage of a general ordi-
nance granting the company the right
to lay the T rail on all streets, and or.
dinance 1913, by which the company
agreed to boulevard the avenue for the,
privilege of laying the t rail, was done
away with. Mr.. 1ngersoll made mos
ton to the effect that the ordinance be
referred to the corporation attorney and
the attorney for the street railway COM
pany to be fixed up. That when the
fixing Was done the result of the work
be submitted to the committee on
streets, and by them to the board. This
was carried and the meeting adjourned.