The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-06-10
PETITION TO ADVANCE
CITY RAILWAY sTIRs UP THE PEND
ING LITIGATION.
City Attorney Endorses the Petition to
Supreme Court and Asks an Inn
mediate Hearing.

The City Railway Company. by its attor-
neys, A. c. Harris and Elliott & Elliott,
yesterday filed an application with the clerk
of the Supreme Court for the advancement
of the case of the City Railway Company
against the city of Indianapolis and the
Citizens Street-railroad Company. 1t will
be handed up to the court this morning. The
petition requests that the case be advanced
and set down for oral argument. BY indorse-
ment at the bottom of the petition the city
of Indianapolis, by John W. Kern, its attor-
ney, valves the service of notice of the fill
ing of the petition and joins in the request
for the advancement of the case.
This is the case in which the Circuit Court
of Hamilton county, sitting at Nobesvile.
held that neither street car company had
any rights to occupy the streets of Indian
apolis after 1901. and that the City Com
pany had no right at any time. The City
Railway Company, in the written document
filed yesterday, respectfully petitions the
court to advance this case upon the docket
and set the same down for oral argument"
and in that behalf says that the controversy
is one of public interest and that public well
fare will be promoted by prompt hearing
and decision; that the questions involved in
the record affect all the cities and incorpo-
rated towns of Indiana "as they concern the
right of municipal corporations to the con-
troll of their streets and the use thereof by
streeI-railroad companies" but that such
questions principally concern the city of In
dianapolis; that the questions require an
early decision as they affect the right Of the
appellant to occupy the streets of Indian
apolis under contract with the city, if the
contract is valid, as appellant contends
Further, it is said that, as the contract of
the Citizens Company expires in 1901, "as
the city of Indianapolis and appellant both
insist" it is important that the cause be
decided at the earliest convenience of the
court in order that appellant may prepare
to enter upon its work, as it desires to do,
Of constructing system of electric rail-
roads, which will require an expenditure of
at least 100000, and that it will take some
time to prepare to construct such a system
1t is also alleged to be important for an
early decision because 1.-The city of Indian
apolis. in the event that judgment be CIV
en- in it's favor against the parties herein,
will require time in which to advertise for
proposals for constructing a system of
street railways, as required by the act of
March 5, 1897 {the New law). and success
full bidder upon the sale of such franchise
and privileges will have to get ready for a
system of street railways to accommodate
the public early in 1901"
The petition is signed by the company's
attorneys and is accompanied by affidavits
of Allen NJ. Fletcher and Fred Fahnley,
stockholders in the company, to the effect
that the matters set forth in the petition
are true.
The Citizens Company did not waive the
service of notice of the filing of the petit
ton Unless it appears voluntarily and con-
sents to the advancement of the case, ten
days notice will have to be given. This, il
is feared, will take the case beyond the
summer adjournment. When the case was
brought up from Hamilton county the city
officials declared that petition to advance
it would be made at once by the city in or
der that decision might be had before the
summer adjournment. There is not much
time left now