The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-08-21

nance. Mr. Nash thought the repre-
sentatives of the Eighth ward should
| do as their constituents wished.
Mr.. Sanborn wanted to know if the
| objection was the running of through
| trains, and was informed that 1t was
| Mr.. Nash thought the stockholders
| of the railway company were selfish
| and in the interest Of dividends would
| run the through cars at such speed
| to damage property and endanger life
| and limb. If the ordinance was put to
vote of the people, SO per cent of the
| vote would be against the passage OF
| the ordinance.
ASSemblyman Thompson made
| talk about the selfish interests of the
| Eighth ward as against the demands
of the public in general.
| Aid. Bell thought the question of
! rapid transit was an important one
and should be considered. "All of you,"
! said Aid. Bell, take the position that
the council intends doing something for
| the street railway company, when such
is not the Intention
| Maj. Espy called the attention of
| the committee to the fact that the ordi-
nance would be a severe blow to the
| city. The company was realizing an
| immense profit on the interurban line.
To grant them additional compensation
! would be an outrage. The people OF
| st. Paul wanted union depot loop and
did not want to pay more fare to get
! to Minneapolis. To a small percentage
] of business men the fast trains would
be of benefit, but not to the general
public.
| Aid. Sanborn thought there was a
| misrepresentation of the ordinance, as
regarded the fast trains. There would
! be really no particular change from the
service now as the cars made the trip
| in fifty-One minutes and if the ordi
! naSSad tha time would hn
made by the local trains in less than
| an hour.
Maj. Espy thought the best thing
the council could. do was to get a stu
dents ticket issued by the company
which would allow those attending the
university to get to that institution for
5 cents the same as Minneapolis He
owned property on Fifth street and
| thought the Broadway loop would i'm
| prove his property, but what was need
ed was close connection with the union
depot. The route on Fourth street as
proposed, he did not think would
| answer this purpose. He was not in
favor of the Broadway loop provision
! of the ordinance at this time.
Aid. Kenny thought the business men
| of the city should be considered. There
was no available street to reach the
! freight houses except Sibiey street, and
the building of a street car line for a
1 Il1IOli uepOl lUOp Oll O1DlSy oIIScI WOulu
longest travel and be of great damage
to the business interests of tbs city.
| T. D. O'Brien inquired if it was true
| that the ordinance allowed the COM
pany to run the cars on the route men.
toned for a period of twenty years.
| Aid Sanborn said that such was the
| case.
Then, Mr.. O'Brien said, it would re-
suit in the city binding itself to allow
the railway company to keep this par
| ticular line in operation for score of
| years and no change could be made
even if it was desired.
Emil Geist thought the whole wrang-
! ling was over the Robert street loop,
| while the main point was whether the
! city should have union depot loop.
! The street car company, it appeared to
| him, was just trying to prevent the
operation of a depot loop. st. Paul
wanted no more rapid transit than it
now had between the city and Mime
| apolis. The company, in his opinion,
was trying to array the citizens of
| lower town against those in the upper
| part of the city.
Prof. Moore, of the state university.
| said he lived just over the city line.
| His neighbors in st. Paul, however,
| were opposed to the ordinance. He,
! thought the street railway company
! had injured the property along the
| avenue. The property owners had Civ
| en- twenty feet of property for a boule-,
| ward without a penny and this had
I been taken by the company Three
| persons had been killed by the cars,
and if through cars We're allowed to
run at faster rate than at present
| there would be much danger to the
| lives of the citizens.
| Aid. SanbOrn said the present ordi-
nance did not allow the company to
run cars at greater rate of speed
| than twelve miles an hour, and the new
| ordinance made no change in this re-
| gard.
Mr.. Moore said he did not know the
| intention of the committee or the gov
| ernfng bodies of the city, but he felt
| certain that the street car company
would run their cars as fast as they
| wanted to. There were other people,
| in his opinion, who had rights on the
| streets as we'll as the railway COM
| pany. From what he had here heard
| it appeared that the council consider
| ed the interests of the street car COM
| pany as primary and all others as in
| cidental. The company had no right TO
| take the property of the citizens. If
| the company wanted rapid transit they
| should purchase property, erect gates
! at street crossings and then run trains
| as fast as they wanted.
| Assemblyman Albrecht thought the
question to be discussed was not
whether the company wanted
rapid transit but did the cit
liens want it. He questioned
| whether the business interests of the
| ciyt wanted rapid transit He sug-
| gested that the various features of the
| ordinance be taken up in a regular
way.
| Mr.. Reardon asked if Mr. Albrecht,
who assisted in the drafting of the
| ordinance. knew of any demand for
rapid transit among the citizens of st.
| Paul.
Mr.. Albrecht said that the idea of
| the committee was to get what it could
! from the street railway company, The
ordinance was submitted simply for
discussion. During the last year the
| council had been unable to get an ex-
preston of the public sentiment. If
the ordinance had done nothing else
1T had at least brought out the public
sentiment
| tons relating to the University avenue
line be struck from the ordinance as
no one appeared to be in favor of the
plan.
I Mr.. Thompson said the business men
of st. Paul demanded rapid transit to
| Minneapolis. 1t might be that this
ordinance was not the proper one but
| the people favored plan of rapid
! transit and the matter should be fully
| considered.
c. B. Bowlby said forty of the leading
retail merchants wanted no change in
the present street railway system. 1t
would be a detriment to the business
| interests of the city. Mr. Kirke en-
| quired whether the merchants were
opposed to a union depot loop. The
|