The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-11-19
TO FORCE The ISSUE
ASSEMBLYMAN ALBRIGHT INTRO
DUCES AN ORDINANCE TO
REPEAL NO. 7O4,
RELATING TO THE CABLE LINE.
CITY WILL TEST THE QUESTION
OF THE COMPANY'S PER-
PETUAL FRANCHISE.
MINNESOTA SAVINGS BANK BOND.
Assembly wouldn't Accept the Prop
ositiOn to Accept $2,633 in Pay
ment of the $4,000 Deposit.

Just before the assembly adjourned
last evening, Assemblyman Albrecht
introduced an ordinance to repeal ordI-
nance 7O4 under which the st. Paul
City Railway company claims a per-
petual franchise to operate its cable
line. After the reading of the Ordl-
nance, Mr.. Albrecht disclosed his pur-
pose in introducing it.
1.-The object of this ordinance" said
Mr.. Albrecht, lis to test the question
whether Ordinance 704 granted the
street railway company a perpetual
franchise or not. If it did, then, of
course, we cannot repeal it, for the
council cannot deprive any individual
or corporation Of their vested rights.
But if Ordinance 704 granted simply a
revocabIe right or privilege then we
can repeal it. L will ask the assembly
to refer the ordinance to the committee
on streets SO that 1t may be carefully
considered and amended if need be, be-
fore being recommended for passage.
Then, if the council passes it, the prop
er steps can be taken to bring the
question before the courts. In my opin-
lOIly IHt utldy tIldI NOuIu We OCCdSlOIl-
ed by first submitting the question to
the district court can be avoided by in
stituting quo Warranto proceedings,
whereby the question may be presented
Immediately before the supreme court,
and settled once for all, within the next
sixty or ninety days"
The ordinance was thereupOn referred
to the committee on streets. Should
the council pass the ordinance and the
street railway company ignore it, on
the ground that it purported to de-
prive the company Of it's vested rights,
the corporation attorney will be in
structed to at once institute the quo
warrantO proceedings.
The committee on ways and means
reported without any recommendation
the proposition of the sureties on the
bond of the Minnesota Savings bank to
pay the city 81, 633 in full settlement of
its claim against them for 100000 the
amount Of the city's deposit in the
bank.
Corporation Attorney Markham ex-
planned the situation, which he admit
ted was considerably involved. The
charter prohibited the city treasurer
from depOsiting in any bank, even
though designated as a city depository,
a sum in excess of the assessed capital
stock of such bank. In this case the
assessed valuation of the banks stock
was 1888. The sureties on the
bond had offered to pay the city this
amount provided they We're released
from any further liability on the bond
Inasmuch as it was considered that
the city treasurer was liable for any
amount in excess of this sum deposited
by him in the bank, the city treasurer
and his bondsmen were asked if they
would consent to the acceptance by
the city of the 1888 offered by the
banks sureties, with the understand
ing that they-the city treasurer and
his bondsmen-would not be absolved
from any liability for the balance of
the $4,000. They replied that they
would not consent to any such ar
rangement. Hence the committee took
no further action.
Mr.. Markham further Informed the