The herald., 1897-10-17

and laying down another track on sale
Alameda street between the points men
toned.
The following is copy of portion o.
the ordinance passed by this city in 1877:
in pursuance of the act of the legisla
ture in reference to railroad corpora
tions, and under which the defendan,
claims the right to lay down the SECOND
track on Alameda sereet:
AN ordinance granting certain privi.
leges in the city of Los Angeles to the
Southern Pacific Railroad company.
THE Mayor and Common Council oi
the City of Los Angeles do ordain as fol
lows:
Section 1. That the right Of way for
the railroad track of the Southern Pa
cific Railroad company in and out of the
city of Los Angeles, for the distance
said company may wish to use the same
be, and the same is, hereby granted to
said company. it's successors and as
signs, over and upon the street and it.;
extension, commonly called Alameda
street. The said company to locate its
track or tracks as rear the center of this
street as may be, and the residue of said
street to be held and used by said city
for the passage of persons and. vehicles
on each side of the same; provided, tina;
said city essly reserves the right to
locate cross streets over and across any
part of Alameda street and railroad
track, as the future improvements ant,
convenience of the city may require
and the railroad company, in considera
ton of said right of way. agree to pro-
vide and keep in repair convenie Mt
crossings over their track or tracks al
the crossing of such streets now in use
or which may be hereafter located by
said city, etc, etc."
RAILROADS A PUBLIC UTILITY
The roads or highways in the country
and streets in the city, says Judge Var
Dyke, in very lengthy opinion, are for
the public use and not for the use merely
Of the coGnties or cities in which they
are located, or through which they pass
and the state has the entire control and
regulation of the same, and the state
granted to railroad corporations, by the
act of 1861. and the amendments thereto,
the right, in the construction of their
roads, to lay single or double tracks
the only limitation being that the. righl
to pass through the public highways OF
the county, or streets of a city should
be obtained from the governing body
or legislative power of the county o.
city. 1t would hardly be contended
that, because a railroad company should
lay but one track along its line of road
in the country in the first instance, Ii
would be precluded thereafter, when the
increase of business should demand
from laying another track, or convert
ing the, single track road into a double.
track road; yet If it be required. to ex-
ercise an option when the road is first
located, as claimed by plaintiffs coun-
sell as to the number of tracks, the same
reasoning should apply to the whole ln4
of the road as to the portion that should
pass through city or town. The ordi-
nance does not in terms fix any timc
within which the track or tracks shall
be laid down in the street, either as to
the commencement of the work of con-
structing and laying down the same, or
the completion thereof. The authori-
ties of city or town, acting in the inter-
est of the public, no doubt could provide
that only one track should be. laid. in the
town upon or through a street. The
busln ess of the road might be so limited
that one track would answer every pur-
pose; and, again, the street might
be so narrow that more than one