The San Francisco call., 1895-07-17
it appear other than what its own language

it appear other than what its own language
makes it.
The Church street people have suffered
long and patiently. They want street rail-
way communication, which the Market
street Company solemnly agreed to give
them three years ago. and they are going
into the civil courts as g means of getting
it. But the people of San Francisco at
large find broader duty before them to
meet the unabashed attempt of their rep
resentatives to repeat this Church-street
law-breaking upon scale of magnificence
that.aI dignihes it.
They propose to lover every outlet OF
the City toward Ingleside, embracing about
fifteen miles of streets, with single appll-
cation for franchise, which they expect
to secure for the same paltry sum of $500,
simply because, by the wording of the ad-
vertisement, no other person or corpora
ton is expected to bid against them,
although other companies are very eager
to secure the right to build over one or the
other of these routes.
The Solid Eight know that the Market
street Railroad Company does not intend
to build the road over Sunnyside avenue.
They know that the infamous outrage that
was perpetrated upon the people of Church
street is to be repeated upon the people of
Sunnyside avenue and all that district, and
they are calmly aiding the big monopoly
in the commission of it. Every detail of
that outrage is to be carried out. Another
railroad company that really wants to lay
tracks there is to be prevented from doing
so under the pretense of giving the people
the service of the Market-street Company,
and then the Market-street Company will
build no road. And the Supervisors know
it will not
That was made perfectly clear even to the
most charitable by Supervisor Taylor when
he moved to fix time limit CT $50 days,
of one year and then two years, each of
which was successively voted down by the
Solid Eight-iust as they voted down the
motion to raise the minimum bid from
$500 to $1,000, and $4,000 and $4,000.
That they had perfect right to so raise
it was made clear, but the Solid Eight were
looking out for the interests of the railroad
company and would not do so.
And Supervisor Hughes, by way of ex-
planning why the application of the San
Francisco and San Mateo Company for a
1TdHCQlSS over one VI IueSS TOuteS was re-
fused, said it was because that company
failed to keep its obligations. But to so
much as refer to that is trit1ing. The
people have determined that the Church
street outrage shall not be repeated. The
law must be observed-and first of all by
the lawmakers.
1t is not that this proposed gift of valu-
able franchise to the Market-street COM
bine is a so much more fagrant defiance of
TIE law than any other of the long series
of outrages perpetrated by the Solid Eight
that causes the people to rise in protest.
1t is the fact that they have now the proofs
of guilt which will enable them to act
which puts weapon in their hands with
which to meet and stop them in their
career.
Every officer of the law knows that there
are certain crimes and misdemeanors
which, although the guilt of the accused
may be patent to them, they find it most
difficult to prove. That is the case with
many of the transactions of the Solid
Eight, conspicuous among them the street
paving order which created Southern Pa
cifc monopoly in bituminous rock, and
the Van Ness avenue paving job. That
there was crookedness here there could be
no doubt in either case, but the proof
would be more difficult. In this gift of a
railway franchise the violation of the law
is so bold that it becomes self-evident.
The law-breakers must be overhauled.