The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-03-11
Provides for a Trolley Bridge Over the
D., L. and W. Tracks.
WAS REFERRED TO COMMITTEE
President Neaiis Argued for the Im-
mediate Passage ofthe Resolution.
After n Long aud Vigorous Debate
the Measure Went to Committee on
Vote OF ~ to 7.-Important
Measures Passed Two Readings.


ern railroad crossing on West Lacka-
wanna avenue.
Mr. Nealis introduced the resolution.
1t read as follows:
That permission is hereby given to the
Scranton Railway company to construct
"A viaducl on West IacKa wanna avenue,
between Seventh and Ninth streets, In
accordance with plan hereto attached;
provided, however, that the plans and
specifications therefor shall be approved
by the city engineer and the city of
Scranton shall pay no portion of the eN-
pense thereof. The said SChanton Rail
way company assuming all liability Tor
claims that might be ocCasioned thereby.
Mr.. Nealis was the chief champion
of the measure in the debate and was
assisted by only Mr. Grier. The oppo-
sition was led by Messrs. Keller, Moir
and Jackson, They succeeded in car
rying their point and had the resolu-
ton referred to committee. The chair
had been relegated To Mr.. Zeidler by
President Nealis early in the session.
The resolution is the outcome of a
resolution recently introduced by Mr..
McAndrew in the upper branch and
adopted. directing the city engineer to
confer with the Scranton railway OFF,
cials relative to trolley viaduct and
to report to councils. No report has
been received from the city engineer.
MOTION AMENDED.
A motion was made by Mr.. Nealis
last night to adopt his resolution and
Mr. Moir offered an amendment to re-
fer to committee.
Mr.. Gilroy urged that the resolution
he not delayed. 1t would be wise to
pass the measure at once or 1T might
not be disposed of before the reorgan-
ization of councils
Mr.. Moir held that the resolution was
too serious "A thing to be disposed of
offhand. It's provisions might be all
right-and he favored a Viaduct-but
the city should be protected by an in
Identifying bond against possible Jam
ages. MIR. Gilroy replied that the law
provided for the damage responsible
ity and did not involve the city.
1t was claimed by Mr.. Nealis that he
had the city solicitors verbal opinion
that tn" company was liable for all
damag, nat might accrue from the
structUrr. ''or fifteen years =" est Sid
ers had clamored for a viaduct and
they had now the chance to get it at
the company's expense. There was no
good reason for councils objecting to
the project.
A West Side member remarked that
a course by means of resolution with
out due Consdera tion and examination
of the plans In committee was improp-
er.
Don't the West Side people want a
viaduct?" Mr.. Nealis asked.
II don't know that they want this
particular one; they don't know any
| thing about it," was the reply.
"They ought to be acquainted with
the plan; it has been published in
the newspapers and plenty of informa =
ton concerning it has been made pub
lic," said Mr.. Nealis.
People don't believe all they see in
the newspapers. They've learned not
20 believe everything they read in the
papers of this city anyhow-I'll tell
you that" exclaimed Mr.. Oliver
THOUGHT IT UNWISE.
Failing to secure a reply from Mr.
Nealis as to the width of the viaduct
| Mr.. Keller said that the viaduct once
| proposed by the city and to have beer
| thirty feet wide was killed in court
| be built without damage liabilities tC
| property owners. In the present case
it would be unwise to permit the erec-
| ton of any structure that was in any
| way questionable. Ample opportunity
| should be given to examine the plan.
and resolution. Because the proposed
| vaduct was to cost the company only
$50, 900 and the city nothing was no ar.
| IN, foN 10 10,
] for the city to spend Sl00, ,000--no con
clusion could be reached at once.
1t was certain, Mr.. Keller continued
| that an overhead viaduct for trolley
| cars only made a death-trap for pedes
| trians and horses on the street below
| IIt was of the opinion if the city per
mitted the building Of such a structure
it would be liable for damages for los!
Of life. A viGduct was something III
was not opposed TO, but he was op
| posed TO half an Improvement or /;
dangerous piece of work that increased
the present danger of the crossing.
Unless the grade in the plans at
tached to the resolution was vastly diff
| ferent from the grade in the old via
| duct measure there was no doubt as L
| liability. Damages could be collected
| in proportion to how low the structur,
was in front of certain properties. TIL,
| members of councils should put them
selves in the place Of the property own
ers, then the foolishness OF a costly eX
| pertinent would be realized.
| Mr. Thomas renewed the motion I,
| refer and Mr.. Nealis continued to op
| pose it. Mr. Moir argued that i'm tn
absence of legal opinion that the cit!
] would not be liable for damages, tn
resolution should not pass.
REFERRED TO COMMITTEE.
| Mr.. Nealis urged the immediate pass
age of the resolution and agreed T.
introduce a repeating measure if MI
Moir or any other member would pro
| cure am opinion from the city solicito
| that the city was in any way liable.
| 1t was suggested by Mr.. Keller that
| without an indemnifying bond tn
company was not showing a willingness
| to take a risk Off the city's hands. Mi
Jackson presented the argument tina
lie had not seen the plans nor ha,
many other members. Without
| knowledge of them no intelligent Vot
In favor of the resolution was possible
The motion to refer to committee wa
for the third time renewed and wa
carried by vote OF 10 to {, as follows
Ayes-Messrs. Reese, Thomas, Flana
| gan. Mor Wenzel. Wirth. Jackson
| Oliver ZeidleT and keller-10 votes.
| Nays-Messrs. Gordon, Grier, Regan
Gilroy, NoOne, Norton and Nealis-7 votes
Three important ordinances from tn
select branch were referred to commit
tee for immediate report, were reporte,
favoTably and passed two readings
| The ordinances were as follows: Pro