Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-08-29

TIE tracks or the OLD railway ht 49,
offer 10 objection, but as 10 gran W.
the old company the privilege ot siec-
trifyirg its part ot Broad street, ana re-
curing the cars of the traction company
To run over the tracks oil the o'i
company. he had TO enter most StTenu-
GUS objections. Mr. Shield declared that
the new petition OF the city Halfway hau
only bsen brought in 70 block the pro-
Cress of the new company. ana ne earn
es.ly hoped that the commute "o"iu
reject IL. 1t would, he SAID, seriously
injurc the traction company 10 nave 'he
CIV Railway own a block in the very
best part OF its line. lie was WiiiihS
10 build the tracks and let the 'ity ran
way run Its cars over them uhner ,he
terms of the ordinance. MI. ShleIu auteu
that 81 was not what the traction
company wanted-it proposed to pulia a
double-track electric road 'he eh''tc
length of Broad street
Mr.. Meredith. OF the old company, SAID
that by the ordinance no company using
diflerent motlve-power could use The
tracks OF another company for a further
distance than three blocks, and remarked
that either way il might be hXed, Win
ont electrifying his road, the same COM
plicatlon would arise.
CITY ATTORNEYS VIEWS.
Clty-Attorney Charles V. Meredith was
called upon and expressed the view that
fhe question was one of whether or pot
the two companies could agree among
Themselves 10 the joint use OF uachs' or
OF how far this new arrangement would
affect the very matter OF competition
which was clearly the sentiment or the
people in the adoption by the Couhcii Oh
tho ordinance of the traction company.
He said that even II the old company
did have the right TO elcctriiy the Broad
street line the Council could take that
right away. lie added that the city
Railway was ccrtaiIiy entitled to two
tracks. ana that me traction company
was entitled to two. and in reply TO a
remark 10y the City Engineer that there
should only be two tracks on Broad
street. said that :here was no way 10
keep these companies from having -FOUR
unless they could reach an agreement
among themselves.
M Ferriter spoke briefly upon the
question. saying that he was III favor OF
,abling the whole matter and allowing
the companies 20 fight out their troubles
in the courts He iil not think the street
Committee or the Council should take any
action whatever under the circumstances.
HAVE But TWO TRACKS.
Colonel Cutshaw. the city Engineer. was
clearly Of the oplton that there should
only be- two tracks upon Broad street.
and said he understood Mr. Williams to
have been satisfied with the arrangement
as presented to the committee by Mr.. W.
l.. MEREDITH. He went carefully over the
whole matter Of putting down tracks, the
complications arising out Of four tracks
on that thoroughfare. and said that II
the Council had so granted franchises 1t
could undo what it mad done. or course,
continued Colonel Cutshaw. II there wer"
10 be four tracks the tracks for the
electric-cars should be nearest the centre
of the street, ana the other tracks on
either side Of them The city Engineer
said he would locate the tracks as the
committee directed him to, but that he
would earnestly recommend against the
laying OF four tracks on Broad street.
MIR. BLOOEBERG'S STAND.
Mir. Bloomberg was not I'm favor Of i'm
peding the progress of the new com
rany in any way. Speaking on the SUBJ
ject. NJ said:
1T was this very question Of having
four tracks on Broad street and transfers
which | foresaw would undoubtedly arise
that induced me at the last meeting OF
this committee to vote FOR the first time
to grant any additional privileges 10 the
City Railway Company. they then agree
ing to do what | thought was right anc
their tracks the whole
length Of Broad street. ] did not at that
time believe that the traction company
would be able to find capital willing 10
inves, In the very rigid charter granted
them. but as they now seem TO b. in
readiness to 20 ahead Il would be eH-
ceedingly unjust Cor this committee 10
throw any obstacles I'm the way Of their
completing their financial arrangements,
and | am not willing to do any act TO
interfere herewith. | am now, as | have
on all former occasions been. utterly op-
posed to granting any part privileges Of
Broad street TO the present company.
They must either take the whole or no
thing When the tracks Of the traction
company are down. and the city Railway
Company desires 10 run their ears on
them. then ! stand willing TO vote them,
and all other companies, the same priv
lo-ce: and, further than that, should the
traction company not build their road.
then l am still ready TO vote for the same
franchise to the City Rail>'ay."
THE PETITION REJECTED.
Mr.. Bloomberg. after the matter had
beeu discussed. offered a motion directing
Of the two companies as 10 give the
traction company the right to build their
road in the centre Of the street. and the
Richmond City Railway 10 place their
tracks on either side Of the tracks u
the new line. This was finally adopted.
as was another motion of sir. Bloomberg
10 reject the petition and ordinance Cf
the CITY Railway. giving II the privilege
10 electrlfy its Broad-street line.
The committee then took mp a number
Of unimportant matters. The bills and
payroll Of the department for the half
month were ordered TO be paid.
FUNDS FOR STREETS
Mr.. Bloomberg here called the atten-
ton of the committee TO the urgent neces
sity Of street work. He said the Finance
Committee had recommended an appro-
pr.atiOn of $4,000 for streets generally,
and $4,000 for the opening Of Foushee
street. The latter street was now being
built up. and there was no immediate
need 10 open it. and he thought that
$4,000 could also be transferred to streets
generally. lie. therefore. offered the fol
lowing. which was unanimously adopted
BE IL ordained by the Council OF the
city Of Richmond:
First. That thF sum OF $4,000 be ana
the same is hereby appropriated 10 sire q
generally. to be divided as follows:
Clay Ward ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. 900
Monroe Ward NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. y O9y
Madison Ward NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. lOo0j
jefferson Ward Observation-Disclosures. licrl
Marshall Ward NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. 1000
jackson Ward OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES. 5000
Incidentals ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. 5000
After the transaction of minor busl-
ness the committee adjourned.
Revising the Ordinances.
The two branches OF the city Council
met at 7:30 O'Clock last night as Com