The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-01-13
ALL NEGOTIATIONS OFF
THE CITIZENS AND CITY COMPANIES
FAIL TO REACH AN AGREEMENT.
Former Files Petition for Rehearing
in supreme Court Case-A Com
ference Yesterday.

Ali negotiations between the Citizens
Street-railroad Company and the City COM
pany for a settlement of the dispute as to
franchise are off. John p. F'renzel for the
City company, met Messrs, Turner and
Jones' of the Citizens company, yesterday
afternoon by appointment and after a long
conference. the parties failed to reach a sat-
isfactory basis of settlement, and separated
without considering any future meetings.
After a petition for a rehearing of the
street-car decision in the Supreme Court
was filed by the attorneys of the Citizens
Street-railroad Company yesterday, Messrs.
Turner and Jones, directors and stockhOld-
ers Of the company, left for Philadelphia.
They departed at 7:10 o'clock p. m. Mr.. Tur-
ner was in a great hurry to catch his train
when he came down from his room at the
Grand Hotel and hardly took time to re-
mark that there was nothing to be added
to what he had already said to the Journal
while here. Mr.. Jones paid his bill at the
Denison Hotel and left in time to board
the same train that carried Mr.. Turner
toward home At the last minute a third
man appeared, who. some thought, was
another party in interest in the Citizens
Street-railroad Company, although none was
found who knew his name. He joined Mr.
Turner when the latter entered his cab to
be driven to the Union Station. When the
street-car stockholders came here, last Sun
day Mr.. Turner said that the present mis-
sion was to consider whether to continue
the litigation by asking for rehearing.
The petition for rehearing having been
filed yesterday, it was said that what steps
had been taken toward a settlement of the
interests of the two companies had availed
little or nothing, and that it would in all
likelihood be a long time before they would
get together, if ever. The representatives
of the Citizens company have every hope
that a new hearing will be granted and the
decision of the court reversed. The three
judges that rendered the majority decision in
favor of the City company have retired, and
the Citizens company hopes that at least
one Of the new judges will vote, with the
two that rendered the dissenting opinion, to
grant new hearing. This view is enter
tanned by the legal department Of the city.
City Attorney Kern was not disposed to dis
cuss the company's petition yesterday. 1t
has not been decided to what extent the city
will cooperate with the Citizens company
on the motion for a rehearing.
While the attorneys are disinclined to in
dictate in advance what course they will pur-
sue when the Supreme Court grants or re-
jects the petition for rehearing, it seems
certain that one of the parties will go to the
Supreme Court of the United States in any
event-the city and the Citizens company
if the decision is reafirmed by the state
court, and the City company if it is re-
versed. So far as a rehearng is concerned,
the interests Of the city and the Citizens
company are about alike.
Quite a number of reasons are assigned
in the petition as to why new hearing
should be granted among others that the
tract between the City Railway Company
and the city. and in holding the company
had certain present rights to the streets OF
indianapolis and other rights that would ac-
crue after 1901; that the court erred IN
! treating as ar open question the controversy
as TO whether the contract gave the City
company rights IN certain streets occupied
/ BY the Citizens company, that question hay
| ing been decided by the United states SUI
/ preme Court. that the court was IN error
/ IN not holding the contract Of the City COM
pany void and against public policy, having