San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1897-04-22
THE CITY'S AUTHORITY OVER
FRANCHISES.

The Houston Post in very forcible
editorial calls attention to the impor-
tant question of the power of city gov
ernments over franchises granted to
incorporated companies, 10 use streets
and furnish gas, water, railway ser
vice. etc. The article deserves a close
reading by every taxpayer in this city,
as well as by our city council who are
a little green yet about city questions:
AN interesting fight is in progress
in Indiana involving the right of num-
cipalities to amend or even annul the
concessions previously made to street
car companies and other corporations
using the public franchises, and so Tar
the victory is with the municipality.
The Indianapolis Street Railway
company had a rty-year.license from
the city, but sought to render its use of
the franchise perpetual. The Legisla-
ture promptly sat down on such a
proposition and in advance reduced
street car fares to 8 cents. The fight is
still on, however, the street car company
with eX-President Harrison as counsel
cOntesting the validity of the Legisla-
lures action. The final decision, it
is thought, will hinge largely on the
point whether those using the fran
chises are paying, under specific con-
| tract, an adequate annual COmpenSa-
| ton for their privilege. In the event
| that a contract for sufficient COnsidera-
| ton has been made, the street car
company will be permitted in all like
| lihOod to enjoy the benefits of the con-
| tract during it's term. There appears
to be no question. however, that if the
use of the streets is a mere grant, with
| out valuable compensation, the munich
pality has right to amend or even an
null it. The right to revoke privileges
| for which no money or valuable con-
| sideratiOn has been given, is supposed
to rest absolutely in a community and
can not be surrendered by even the
city council. Indeed, it was once held
| in this state that a city council could
only make contracts and grant privi-
leges for the term of that council. But
the law does not go that far now. The
right to control. amend or annul grants
of mere licenses, not enjoyed under q
contract for adequate consideration
and only made with the city council
strictly within the limits of it's powers
can not possibly now be questioned.
1t is right and proper that city coun-
ellis should appreciate their powers in
the premises. It is we'll that they un,
derstand that they have absolute con.
troll over public franchises for the pub
lie benefit and that the public benefit
would be interpreted to mean the best
and most profitable disposition that
could at any time be made Of the fran
chises and that this power continues
until the franchises have been SOLD
for a certain period under valid con-
tract for a valuable compensation
Corporations that are Using public
streets and enjoying valuable privileg'
es without paying anything for them
). | are in the nature of mere tenants a.
will or sufferance. They often act
however, as if they owned the street!
and owned a monopoly, as in the cas-,
Of this Indianapolis company.
, The people in different portions o
= the country are now beginning to ap
1 preciate the value of public franchis
= es and understand the public's power
= and rights in the premises. In tn
= earlier days before the value of thes
/ franchises was properly measured
. many reckless grants and so-calle
> contracts were made which would nc
+ now stand a legal test if carried int
5. the courts.
e DIR. John Grant is getting chumm
r, with the Louisiana and Florida DO!
>, | sns Nir,nhnrl,. nna Gtrnr,m