The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-02-18
BITTER FIGHT
AGAINST THE
FENDER BILL
Powerful Lobby Led
by Vining.
MAGNATES AT THE CAPITAL
MARKET STREET MANAGER AND
BRAUNHART DISAGREE.
MAGNATES AT THE CAPITAL
MARKET STREET MANAGER AND
BRAUNHART DISAGREE.
The Senator's Measure Denounced as
''Cinch" of the First Order.
Adverse Report of the
Assembly Committee.

CALL HEADQUARTERS, SACRA-
MENTO, Feb. he. p. Vining, manager
of the Market Street Railway system, this
evening accused Senator Braunhart of
having introduced Senate bill 72, the
fender BILL" for the sole purpose of fore
ing the Market street people and other
railroad corporations to put up" Mr..
Braunhart, in turn, accused Mr.. Vining
of having circulated a printed statement
to the effect that the two-and-a-half-cen
fare bill, introduced by him two years
ago, was a cinch bill. Mr.. Vining modest
~ confessed that this was SO and Senator
Braunhart waXed angry.
Incidentally the Assembly committee on
corporations. before which this edifying
squabble took place, reported the bill back
to the Assembly with the recommends
ton that it do not pass.
No matter for what purpose or with
what bright hopes Braunhart really Of
fered the bill, it has resulted in the gath
ering here of a powerful lobby. Mr.. Vim
ing sent none of his minions nor an at
torney; he came himself to tell how it is
that people get in front of his cars and
are of a consequence killed, and or the
virtueus intention of his company to equip
in time all of it's cars with life-Sav1ng
tenders.
The San Mateo and San Francisco line
was represented by it's secretary, William
-
Haywards line by it's vice president and
secretary, William j. Landers and S. B.
McLanigan, and the San Jose and Santa
Clara road by j. P. Burke.
The bill which these men have come up
ton operating cars on the streets
Of cities or towns, or on the
county roads within the. State, for
the conveyance of passengers, propelled
by means of wire ropes attached to sta
tionary engines, or by electricity or COM
pressed air, shall run, operate or use any
car or dummy unless each car and
dummy, while in use, shall have suit
able fender or appliance placed In front
or attached to the trucks of such dummy
or car, for the purpose of removing and
clearing obstructions from the track and
preventing any obstacles, distractions or
person on the track from getting under
said dummy or car and remove the same
out of danger and out of the way of said
dummy or car. And no person, company
or corporation operating cars on the streets
of cities or towns or ON the county roads
within the State for the conveyance of
passengers shall run, operate or use any
such car unless each car, while in. use.
shall be fitted with brake capable of
bringing such car to stop within rea
sonable distance"
The exception taken to it by the trans
portation people is that it is vague in it's
intent and its requirements. In speaking
Of this Mr.. Clayton said;
my first objection to Senate bill 72 is
that 1t is so vague and at the same time
so arbitrary in some of its conditions that
/ do not believe 1t possible for any rail-
cally states that all street railway cars
must have fender which will prevent
the wheels from injuring a person who
may be struck by a car. Our failure to
provide fender as called for by this bill
could, under a statute, be very unfairly
construed as negligence upon our part.
Take a supposititious case: A boy plays
| ball in the street. He runs suddenly in
| front of the car, eight or ten feet away,
| trips, falls fiat and in such a position as
| to make it impossible for the fender to
| pick him up. He is run over by the car.
| Both his legs are crushed and subsequent
| ly amputated. He RECEIVERS, but is Grip
pied for life. If we had a. fender on the
| car that fulfilled the conditions imposed
| nv that statute. which it especially states
| shall be of character suitable to prevent
| the car from running over person. most
certainly the boy would not have lost his
| legs. Consequently, our failure to provide
! such fender is negligence and it is due
! to that negligence on our part that the
| boys legs were cut of.
| Mr.. Vining said practically the same
| thing. He said that no fender had yet
been invented that would in every case
protect person from being ground under
| the wheels; that his company was con-
money in trying to find fender that
would. There is the strongest lncentiye
| he said, for every company, to put life
saving tenders on its cars, from the fact
| that they would save thousands of dollars
| each year in damage suits.
| Besides all this, Mr.. Vining asserted
that not one of the scores of unfortu.
mates who have been sacrificed on his road
was killed by the negligence. of the com,
pany mot one person who has beer
killed" he said, was in possession of al
his faculties. They were all inf1rm III
some particular. They either had fits IL
| front of the cars, or were crippled, OF
blind, or drunk, or had bad teeth. or were
otherwise rendered liable to being rur
into and over by car going at full
| speed"
! Senator Braunhart came down from the
| Senate, which was In evening session up.
stairs, to put in q counter argument, but
his, dislike for sVining, engendered two
| years ago, got the upper hand and he
! accused him of having circulated in ths