The record-union., 1897-02-19

with instructions to pass upon its con-
StitutionalGty.
STREET RAILROAD FARES.
Committee substitute for S. B. 80, to
reduce the rates of fares on street
railroads within the incorporated linn
it's of municipal corporations of the
first class and 10 require the issuance OF
tickets, not exceeding sixty, ait reduced
rates, to any one person, was called up
and Braunhart said ne hoped no fur
ther reference to committees would be
made. He subsided in order to allow
the Committee on Rules and Revisions
to hand IN a report announcing THAT
while the bill was correct in text and
reference it was unconstitutional.
BRAUNHART'S FIGHT.
Then Braunharrt took up the thread of
his argument and scored Dickinson and
Withfng gton for waiting until the last
moment to hand in an adverse report.
He submitted that the opinions of
couple of ordinary lawyers had no
weight with him as to the constitution
ality of the bill, and contended that
similar mea Sures were passed daily and
favored by both Wilmington and Dick
inSon.
For a full hour Braunhart held the
floor and turned loose a volume of ar
gument intended to prove that the bill
was constitutional. He showed, among
other things, that a similar state of af
fairs as those proposed by the bill eX-
listed in the city of Detroit, and had
proven "a success in every particular.
WOLFE AGAINST 1T.
Wolfe, who followed, declined to dis
cuSs the question from a constitutional
stand point and also said he should not
attempt to reply to the slurs cast by
Braunhalt. From the speech THAT had
just been made one would imagine, he
said, the poor of San Francisco We're
standing upon the street corners wait
ing for the Senate to come to their re-
lief with the Braunhart two-and one
half-cent bin. He contended that the
gripmen and conductors who had been
sneered at by Braurhart were fully as
intelligent as the author of the bill,
and the speaker had received a petition
signed by 5000 of those same gripmen
and conductors protesting against the
| passage of the bill. In the interest
of these thousands, he opposed the bill,
and did so fear1essly, believing that
the people of San Francisco understood
and appreciated his endeavors. The
una animous opinion of the Workingrnen
of San Francisco, he said, was against
| the passage of the measure. He con-
tended that IA reduction of fares meant
THAT a number of roads in San Fran
cisco would have to be run at a loss,
and 1T would be bad policy to slap at
| the Market street corpora ton and
Thereby ruin a number of others.
Wilmington spoke regarding the con-
stitutionaNty of the Act and explained
the action of the committee in handing
in an adverse report.
A PETITION.
Mahoney got the floor and presented
a petition signed by $500 employees Of
san Francisco sdraet railway corpora
tions protesting against the passage of
| the bill on the ground that a reduction
of fares meant a like reduction of
wages.
| Morehouse cited a number of author
tiles to show that an enactment of the
kind proposed would be unconstitu-
| tionaI. He argued that the bare state
ments made by Braunhart was the only
| incentive offered to pass the bill.
Smith thought that while the bill was,
| in his opinion, entirely constitutional,
he could not support the measure for
the reason that its proponents had ut
terly failed to make their case. The
| showing had not been made that by
the passage of the bill justice would be
done to both the populace and corpor-
ations.
BERT OPPOSES.
| Bert did not base his opposition to
| the bill upon its unconstitutionality,
| but upon the ground that some Of the
| San Francisco railway companies
would be forced out of the business. He
| cited the statement made that the Pre-
| sidio road, in which $500, 900 Of capital
was invested, had not declared a divi-
dend for six years, and said that the
| passage of the bill, beside running, fl
nanciaIly, the corporation, would throw
| its employees on the streets to join the
| thousands of unemployed already
| there
Braunhart closed. submitting that the
| sgners Of the petition mentioned by
| several speakers did not represent Or
| ganized labor but that they would do
| so were they not withheld by the
street railway corporations. He pro-
| tested that the constitutionality of the
measure was a question for the courts
to determine but that precedent
| showed the Act would be clearly valid
wilmington took issue with Braun
hart regarding an authority cited by
the latter. hut was obliged to with
draw. badly battered when Braunhart
drew the transcripts Of the case upon
| him Braurhart also answered the OBJ
| lection advanced by Smith, quoting
! decisions in defense of his position. The
| Speaker declared that he was not in
| terested in legislating against the Mar
| ket-streat railway. but that his bill
| was in the interest Of the entire city OF
| San Francisco. The Speaker scored
Wilmington and Smith from long taw
and 50 far a. they were concerned had
much the best Of the round.
The bill was refused passage by a
vote Of ayes. :}3 noes. Braunhart
| Dwyer. Hall. LaRue, Seawell and To-
ner voting aye, Linder not voting.
Holloway. for the Committee on At
| taches. reported back the resolution
providing that W. r. Porter be al
lowed S16 for two days services as min
ute clerk before org2 nization, recon-
mending that It De adopted. The re-
port of the committee was agreed to
! by a vote of - TO q.
ASSEMBLY MESSAGE.
A message was received from the
| \ sequbly al E1uncing that that body
| had refused to concur in the Senate
| amerdm mt to the concurrent resolu-
| tion providing for the appointment OF
a committee to investigate the charges
made by the Governor against the