The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-05-10

ing organization OF the company at present
is the most compact, efficient and econOml-
cal one i'm its history. Mr.. Milholland, sec
rotary and treasurer, has charge of the
office, having been in the employ of the
company for many years, and reached his
present position by well deserved promo
lions. Besides the superintendent. of whom
mention has been made, | take pleasure
in mentioning Mr.. W. r. Lewis, assistant
superintendent, who has been in the en-
ploy of the company for twenty years, Mr..
McCreary, who has been in the electrical
department from its beginning and now, as
electrician, has charge OF the two power
stations, the overhead lines, repair shops
and rolling stock of the company. The
roadmaster, Mr.. G. S. Butts. was first en-
ployed about four years ago. and has
shown himself to be a skillful surveyor as
Well as roadmaster. In mentioning these
faithful servants of the company, there IS,
however. no disposition to exclude from
honorable mention the office employees and
barn foremen, the road officers and others
on whose successful efforts the efficient
service rendered by the company so largely
depends.
QUESTION OF FRANCHISE.
while the company has thus gone stead
lily forward in the improvement of it's prop
erty, it's organization, its service to the
public and its economies, it has, neverthe-
less. passed through most trying ordeals in
it's relations to the municipal government
of the city of indianapolis.
previous to March Is, 1898, there had
been much public criticism of the company
on account of its inferior service and fail
ure to give the entire city rapid transit.
There were, no doubt, other sources OF crit
icism, but of these the chief one was th@
fact that the company did not pave De
tween its tracks. At the tlme tne oragbLil "a
ordinance was passed in 1864, under Wnlch
the company operates. it required the COM
pany to pave etween its tracks, but a
few years later al ordinance was passed,
prepared by the city attorney and not OPP
posed by a single paper in the city, renew
ing the company from the burden of paw
inc and substituting OnlV the requirement.
that the company keep the spaces between
its tracks in repair. AS Indianapolis mas,
in the last few years, been passing through
a period of extensive street improvements
including the use of asphalt, brick and
block paVements, the question or the COM
pany paving between It's tracks assumed
much greater importance than at the time
the amending ordinance had been passed IN
Feeling the dissatisfaction of the public
and desiring to discharge their whole duty
TO the city of Indianapolis, the new BOARD
first task to appear before the Board of
Public Works and state that the company
BILE and just arrangement by ,Which II
should comply with the demands OF the
city of Indianapolis and at the same time
have proper security for the necessary IN
vestment. To this proffer, the Board or
Public Works, under advice OF the city al
torney, answered that they W noml
pany whatever as to terms OF settle
ment of existing controversies. On the con-
trarY, the board declared tnaL tue SoA-
pany's rights in the streets of l~ndlanapo-
lis would expire in the following January,
after which it would be treated as a tIes-
passer. The Board of Public works then
proceeded, a few days later, to advertise
and sell a so-called franchise to the nigh
est bidder. commencing Immediately and
rnnnine for a period of thirty years. This
alleged franchise was purchased by the
City Railway Company, a new organlZaI
local capitalists. The new company lm5
mediately laid claim to all the streets ana
parts of streets occupied by the citizens
Company. An injunction suit was there-
upon brought by the Citizens company
against the City Company in the federal
court to enjoin the defendant from inter-
fering with the occupying company and TO
quiet the title of the latter to the use OF
the streets. This suit resulted in a victory
for the Citizens Compan in November, 1884.
There was a difference of opinion between
the two judges as to the time or the eXplra-
ton of the rights of the Citizens Company.
The original city ordinance under which
the company operates ran until January,
1894. A so-called extension ordinance was
passed in 1880, making the time of eXpira-
ton 1901. This extension ordinance the city
attorney assumed to be invalid. Both
judges agreed that the extension ordinance
pany should be enjoined. But Judge Woods,
presiding, held that the city had no power,
by ordinance, to FIX a time limit Tor the
poses, and that the Citizens Company, be-
ing a corporation in perpetuity, had a con-
tinuing right to use the streets, subject
only to the reserved power of the Legisla-
ture to alter, amend or repeal the charter
of the company itself. The City Railway
Company appealed this case Immediately to
the Supreme Court of the United States.
MORE NEGOTIATIONS.
pending this appeal, the Citizens Com
pany renewed it's efforts to obtain a set
tlement with the city of Indianapolis, be-
ing ready at all times to make just and
reasonable arrangements with the city.
These efforts, however, were met from the
beginning with the statement on the part
of the city government that TN new COM
pany now had acquired, by the so-called
franchise Of 1898, certain contract rights
with the city, or claimed TO have acquired
them, and therefore the city was morally,
if not legally, bound to refuse to make
any negotiations or settlement with the
Citizens Company. unless the City Rail
way Company should consent to surrender
its rights. BY this ingenious opposition on
the part of the city government, the Citi-
zens' street-railroad Company was put in
a false position before the people, most of
whom supposed that the company was
stubbornly refusing to pave between its
tracks or to make any other proper return
for the privileges it was enjoying. In the
summer of 1895 a negotiation was under
taken for the settlement, which was to in
clude not only the city government, but
also the City Railway Company, 1t being
intended to procure that company to sur
render it's so-called rights. The writer was
not a member of the IN which con-
Quoted the negotiation and did not per-
sonally participate in the matter. However,
at one time there was, as | believe, good
reason for believing that this settlement
would go through, Notwithstanding the eX-
traordinary concessions which were re-
quired by the City Railway Company in
order to induce it to surrender its sup
posed rights. So far as the city was con-
cerned, its special %cousel. the late Hon.
ter to the mayor, outlined substantial
ly the terms of settlement which he
advised the city to make with the Citizens
Street-railroad Company. The directors of
be entirely willing to settle on the basis
proposed by the city's own attorney, Mr..
Butler. Meanwhile, an injunction suit was
brought by a citizen of Indianapolis to en-
join the proposed settlement, and the city
government began to raise it's demands
from day to day, until, in the course of
two or three months, the plan of settlement
advised by its attorney, Mr.. Butler was
to be thought of. The terms of settlement
proposed by the city We're impossible and
impracticable for this company, taking into
view the enormous sacrifice necessary to
Compan from the field. In the fall of
1895, it became apparent that the proposed
settlement was a failure, and in October
the mayor and council went out of office
and a new administration into office.
so far as the Citizens Street-railroad
! Company was concerned. the change in adj
ministration did not improve the chances
of a settlement. The demand of the City
tirement from the field, was larger than it
had previously been, and the new mayor
was equally as firm as his predecessor in
the position that the city of Indianapolis
City Railway Company were gotten out of
the way. Our board of directors found it
impossible to comply with the double re-
quirements thus imposed by the city of In
~ --l -. H. nH4- o.