The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1897-11-18
CAR LINES BEFORE COUNCIL.
ALDERMEN DISCUSS THE STREET
RAILWAY SITUATION.

ObJectlOns 10 the new Arrange
ment of the Lines-NO Definite Ac-
tiOn Taken.
The city council devoted considerable
time last night TO the operation OF the
street railways. but without accomplish
ing anything.
The discussion came up on Alderman
WHY'S ordinance TO regulate street rail-
ways and also the petition Of the Brough-
ton street merchants that cars be operated
both ways on that street.
The ordinance was on its second reading
It requires that all new rails laid shall be
Of not less than fifty pounds weight to the
yard. and that all wooden poles shall be
replaced. as they wear out, with iron poles.
The street railway company is required to
run its cars both ways on Broughton, St
Julian and Whitaker streets, and the en-
fOrcement Of the ordinance is placed in
the hands of the street and lane commit
tee.
Alderman Guckenheimer offered an
amendment requiring that any railway
company which shall lay it's tracks on any
paved street, shall be required to pay into
the city treasury an amount equal to the
cost Of paving between its tracks and for
two feet on each side.
Alderman Guckenheimer illustrated the
intention Of his amendment by referring
to Abercorn street where he said that the
railway company had removed one of its
tracks to escape the paving assessment. It
is now about to replace this track and
ill.
cape the cost of paving, which it would
have had to pay had il never removed the
track.
Alderman Charlton moved that the
whole matter be postponed.
Alderman We'll and Guckenheimer urged
immediate action, the latter remarking
that hasty action on street railways SEEM
ed to be the rule with council.
On call of the yeas and nays it was
decided by vote of to 3 to take up the
matter at once. Aldermen Charlton.
Davis and Hull voted in the negative.
Col William Garrard, representing the
railway company, discussed the ordinance
a some length. The company had no OBJ
lection to the section relating to the weight
Of rails, he said, nor to the one requiring
old poles to be replaced by iron poles on
condition that all other companies using
poles be also required to replace old poles
with iron or steel poles. What is fair for
one is fair for all, he said. To the section
relating to Barnard Whitaker, Broughton
and st. Julian streets, and requiring the OPP
Grafton of cars in both directions on these
stretes, Col. Garrard made objections. He
referred to the cty's contract with the
company that the latter was required to
remove all switches on Whitaker street,
leaving only single track on Whitaker
street The intention and design, he said,
was to operate Barnard and Whitaker
streets as a double track cars running
north on one street and south on the 9TH
er.
The present schedule on Broughton
street, Col. Garrard said, of car every
eight minutes, cannot be improved while
the tracks remains as at present. He
read the description of the Broughton and
St Julian streets loop. Such loops are
common in the large cities, he said. The
pan OF the company is to double-track
Habersham street TO Broughton Cars
VIII be run north on the left hand track
turning into Broughton street, going west
on that street to Montgomery. turning
north and back to Broughton by the st.
Julian street track. The loop would also
be used, he said by cars coming from
West Broad street, which would turn in
on Broughton street, go up to the market
around st. Julian and back on Broughton
20 West Broad street. The intention of
the company is to operate a five
minute schedule, instead of the
present eight-minute schedule. on
Broughton street, Col Garrard said The
double tracking of Broughton street is
certainly not desirable, he said and if a
5-minute schedule should be run under
the present plan there is certainly no
necessity for double tracking
Alderman Guckenheimer withdrew his
amendment with regard to paving upon
the advice of City Attorney Adams that
| under the contract with the railway com
pany, the ordinance would be of no eff
| feet.
Alderman Guckenheimer asked some
questions, which, he said, were intended
to show that 1t was the original intention
| OF the railway company to run its cars
around by st. Julian and thence to
Broughton and that the reverse schedule
was an after-thought. To operate the lat
ter schedule it would be necessary to run
the cars on the left hand tracks, whereas
the rule was to operate the cars on the
right hand tracks.
Alderman Wylly inquired of Col Gar
rard if it had not been announced that
the object of the railway company was to
meet the wishes of the people. He asked
if it were NOT true that the people on
Broughton street were almost unanimous
In favor of having cars run both ways on
Broughton street. then why did not the
railway company grant this wish.
The petition of the Brougton street mer-
chants was taken from the table and read
III Is signed by practically all the business
firms and property owners on the street
Hon Pope Barrow, representing the rail-
way company, said that Alderman Guck-
enheimer was correct in supposing that
the original plan was to run the Brough-
ton street cars north to st. Julian street
through the market and around to Brough
ton street, but at the suggestion of some
gentlemen interested in Broughton street
1t was decided to runs the cars first down
Broughton street. The present schedule. he
said, is nominally eight minutes and really
Iearer ten minutes. The new system
would give almost twice as many cars
on Broughton street. Two tracks would
be an injury to the street, Mr. Barrow
contended, and would result finally in
running away business. When the peo-
pie on Broughton street understood the
schedule proposed by the railway com
pany, Mr.. Barrow said, their objections
will be found to be groundless. There is
nothing to prevent council from bringing
up such an ordinance at any time. Mr.
Barrow said, and. therefore, why not let
the people try the new schedule before
passing Judgment on IT,