The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1899-10-17


quite a busy time yesterday. The reg
,lar meeting was held at o'clock and
continued until 1880 IL then adjourned
To- meet next Thursday evening at $50
O'Clock. The Committee had called
meeting at $50 O'Clock TO consider street
Railway Franchises and adjourned until
o'clock Friday night to continue the
consideration.
Tho committee met for the consid-
Grafton OF street-railway franchises at
$50 o'clock with these members present;
Messrs Whittet Pollock, Ebol Gibson,
King. I.awder. Bahen. Peters, Bioomberg
and Burton. ,,....,
Wos .read:
M began by quoting the resolution
adc)led bv The Committee on Streets
which read.
Resolved that the City Attorney be.
and he is requested TO inform this COM
mittee If the present Council OF the Clly
of Richmond is competent 10 award 10
any company or corporation otAer IMAM
the Richmond Railway and Electric COM
pany. a franchise for "a street railway 10
Doe operated along the present lines OF the
Richmond Railway ana Electric com
many. the existing franchises for wnlch
Will expire January list. 1900, ana beceh-
Der 3lst. 1900 the same io become
operative Oh or subsequent TO January
lst, 1901
The CITY Attorney says it is not clear
whether the Committee wished 90 Doe in-
formed on one or two points, VIZ
TWO DEFINITIONS.
Whether this Council can grant fran
take eject
in the future. 10 parallel on the same
streets the lines of the routes oi The Kich-
mond Railway and Electric Company or
Whether the present council is COM
patent 10 grant a franchise 10 any one
other than the Richmond Railway and
Electric Company or ITS assignee 10
take effect on the expiration Of the fran
chise of said company TO operate
street railway ON the same streets and
iu the same location in the streets where
thc tracks OF the Richmond Railway and
Electric Company are now located
~ the first version is correct the Cliy
Attorney answers. Yes, provided the
time iu the future for the franchise or
0inauce TO take effect is not So distant as
To- raise the presumption that it was pur-
uoscly SO adopted i'm order 20 defeat fu-
ture councils from leglslaing on the
subject
true one. must bee determined by pro-
ler understanding OF section u of the or
duauce of March o. 1850 Ordinances lSo1,
yago l9iJ
WHAT N SAYS.
The ordinance referred 10 provides that
street railway franchises may be extend
.I with proper restrictions and II the
Council shall fail Tor one year to give
uoloe to the company or corporation ot
its purpose Go insist upon a new contract,
tAc assent Of ihe Council 10 "a continuance
ot the privileges enjoyed for "a period OF
fifteen years upon the same terms shall
be presumed. But provides the orGi-
nance if the Council refuses the eNten-
sion OF. or if the Council and the company
or corporation cannot agree upon terms,
thc Council shall have The right 20 take
and shall take the plant of the company
or corporation al price to be fixed by
arbn-atlou.
AGREES WITH MR.. MEREDITH
The city Attorney says the language
OF the section is not clear. but he con-
ours sub ianually with his predecessor
,Mr Meredith in his opinion of october
j. 1897 where he says:
"lt will be seen from the above sec
lion that the present Council has not the
power 10 dispose of said routes without
The consent OF the said company so as TO
prevent that Council which shall be elect
ed ia 1898 from regranting the route which
shall expire December 81 1899, nor 20 pre-
vent that Council which shall be
elected In lao from regranting 10 the
said company the routes which shdi
expire Of the 3lst day Of Decem-
oer 1900 OF course, If the present
Council and the company. can come 20
terms AS 20 any extension Of franchise it
can be done by mutual consent. but only
ln that manner
a CONTINGENCY
NJ. Pollard Celebrates this however. with
Zoe opinion that the provisions of section
~ is 20 add another year of vitality to
tach one Of the franchises. during which
additional year no contract for "a new
franchise 10 another company 10 operate
over thc same route along the same lines
can bc entered into that the Council then
ln power could not undo and commit tho
franchise again n The old company
lns council or its successor might
SIah' irai chiscs 20 another company 20
take cnect after the expiration of the
aodinon7l time allowed for agreement
WIN me old company. but If done with
ONT Che old company consent tho novy
franchise would hc subject 10 repcai bv
any 'ounch in power prior 20 the cxpira-
lion of The extra year given Tor agreement
bel wecn the city and The old comnanv.
After the reading Of the opiniou Mr.
King moved to take up for consideration
the Boyd-Newton syndicate ordinance
Mr. g. y. Meredith. representing tho
Richmond Tranciion Company. asked If
me committee should not decide 10 whom
the franchise - % be- given before franz
inE au ordinance
MI Pollock moved that an counsel be
heard before proceeding. which motion
was adopted.
IMPORTANT QUESTION.
MI Meredith said The franchise was
very important matter. and this meet
Ing an exceedingly important one % the
clt> III asked that the franchise be
given 10 The Company which could give
tho city the most. The Boyd Newton
syndicdif and tho 1ipctsoa Company
n~.ther came with an, bus business SEN
I 'ent
"a IL wise to consolidate. is the lrst