The herald., 1898-12-10
FAVOR The FRANCHISE
ELEVENTH STREET TRACTION
LINE WILL MATERIALIzE
IF COUNCIL DOES NOT OBJECT
Property Owners Want the Road and
the Board Of Public Works Is
Set Right as to the Law

In all probability the board OF public
works will on Monday recommend to the
council that a franchise for a street rail
way on Eleventh street, between Georgia
and Hoover streets, be offered for sale
For weeks the residents in the neighbor
hood, together with the Traction Railway
company, have exerted their best efforts to
have the board recommend that a franchise
be offered to the highest bidder over the
following route: Beginning at the intersec'
tion Of Eleventh and Georgia streets, run
ming thence westerly on Eleventh street to
Sentous street, thence northery on Sentous
street to Eleventh street, thence westerly
on Eleventh street to Hoover street.
From time to time petitions with large
property representation have been filed, and
attorneys for both the railroad company
and the property owners have argued In
favor OF the improvement, but all to no pur-
pose. Each time the board would take the
matter under advisement, for the reason
that it was of the opinion that, under the
eSistfhg state laws, II would be impossible
to grant or sell franchise.
When the question as to the citys right
first arose the board appealed to the city
attorney for his opinion, who in turn ap-
pealed to Attorney J. s. Chapman. The
latter held that he would not advise the
city council to sell franchise until the
legislature passes a new statute. On ac-
count Of this opinion, the board has delayed
action, hoping that matters could be post
poned until the legislature had taken action.
The requests of the residents of the So
called isolated section of the city was not
H. I, ell with
ton. Yesterday at least fifty of the resi-
dents appeared before the board, and, from
their manner, had come to stay until the
board had either refused or granted their
request"
When the board convened, almost an hour
later than usual Attorney p. r. Wilson re-
quested the privilege of explaining the legal
ity of granting the franchise for street
railway, which, he stated, the property
owners along the proposed line were anx-
ious to have and which was almost public
necessity. He referred to the three statutes
passed by the legislature in the years 1893
and 1897
The act of 1893, he explained, governed the
granting of franchises in both cities and
counties. That of March l3, 1897, was in
tended to govern in Incorporated cities, and
that of the 18th of March of the same year
was framed with the intention of having it
apply outside of incorporated cities The
latter, he said, the council had nothing what
ever to do with.
As to Mr. Chapman's opinion, Mr.. Viii
son explained that Mr.. Chapman held that
the act of March l3, 1897, which went into
effect sixty days after its adoption, repealed
the original act, or that Of 1893. The law
of March 10th, according to Mr.. Chapman,
practically take5thaAolaS OF the ac. of 1888.
Mr.. Wilson argued that from Mr.. Chap
mans statement but one inference could be
drawn, and that was that the first act OF
1897 repeals the act of 1893, and that being
the case. the act of March 49, 1897, which
amended the law of 1903, was null.
''If an act amends an act that has been
repealed" he said, ''it does not need an at
torney to tell you that the act is void. This
being the case, and you can all see that it is,
there is but one law under which the fran.
chise could be granted and that is the law
of March 10, 1897
AS to the new statute which the city at