The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1899-12-10
Municipal Ownership Advocates
Dsnounos City Councilman.
FAltvRs TO ostAIN 4 ouoHuM.
Haiter OF the Fusion organ De-
Aesncca ~ Dr. Titus-orators DEE
clare rositieA az Their Followers
assert Council Majority 10 he
Dsreliet In Dssy-Fight to he Re-
Moved 1t Monday nights Meeting

An0tner 1uttie attempt 10 nOlu iueet-
M Of the city council for the purpose Of
n5cipal ownership ana referendum amend
ments to the city charter was made last
ninht. Only I'VE members OF the council
we're present. and for want Of q quorum
The meeting adjourned. Those present
vero Hill, Navsn, McArdle, Crawford.
p6Dniists, and Crichton. Republican. The
sthsr Republican members Of the council
md Diller, Democrat. were absent
ii leu Of transacting any business.
vhach those present could not do owing to
the provisions of the city charter, about
an hour was spent listening to speeches
from advocates of the two proposed
amendments. All Of the speeches were In
denunciatory vein, and the absent coun-
cilmen came In for several ''ronsts"
Ex-lGayor Wood was the first speaker.
HIS address was OF temperate order. and
~ spoke deprecatingly OF the action Of
the counciimen who for a week have failed
% attend the meeting. which the mu-
nicipai ownership people claim was legally
called for the purpose OF submitting
Among other things Judge Wood said:
s.To Z man up . tree there seems to be
conspiracy or mutual understanding
among majority OF the council to absent
themselves from TIL: meeting, and Il that
that the purpose Of this conspiracy n to
20 delay the submission Of the two amend
ment in question that they cannot be voted
On ct the next election. We will know In
u their duties on the part OF the city
couucilrnen IL INTENTIONAL and II II Is, the
people win mark and remember wen this
disfssard Of Their rights There p no oc-
their rights and how to get Them
Judge Wood was followed by Anthony
Corcoran. who also spoks with moderation.
Then J. G. Allen took the floor and de-
nyered q denunciation Of the alleged de-
MnQuents In scathing terms He charac-
terfked the actions OF the majority of the
counc.lmen as ungentlemanly, cowardly
and derelicticr Of Official duty" He
pralsed the five members who attended the
meeting, and his sentiments were applaud
ed foundly from the lobby. which was filieI
With advocates of municipal ownership,
Goodwin Democrats. Populists and members
Nj. Allen was followed by Edward Clay
son, Or, the local father OF the Popul.sts
N. Clayson moved , vote Of mo con-
Tdsncss IN the absent councilmen. which
Cf order, because 1t did not come from q
member Of the council
Everett Smith made n short speech,
nkening the city to a corporation and the
eounc.ltren to board OF trustees. A ma
3ority Of tEs trustees. he said, had demon
Ar4ted tliSi- incapacity to MI the positions
and he prophesied their defeat at the next
siecticr
Dr. Titus was the last speaker. In
strong terms he denounced Editor Blethen,
Of the Evening Times characterizing him
a. A. enemy to the public.
TIE Post-Intel1igencer." declared DIR.
Titus with great vehemence and amid APP
pl4use, has endeavored to be somewhat
fair n its reports Of our fight in behalf Of
these tsyo measures evan though 1t is
fecogni-9z az the leading opponent of both
q them. But the Times has absolutely
ignored w and has refused to print actual
news until I have such a great contempt
for II that sincerely hope nothing thai
say will be published within It's columns
/. Continuing, the speaker argued that the
council had no cho.ee but to submit the
appointments pettioned for. He commended
that It was mandatory TO do so. He de-
Tended the special meeting, saying 1t was
legally called. He quoted Hermon w.
Craven, Harold Preston and John J. Nc
Glvra as authority for the statement that
the call was In due form. At the conciu-
sion Of DR.. Titus speech the meeting adj
5ourned.
Monday night Is the regular meeting
night Of the council and 1t Is expected thai
the advocates of the amendments will re-
new their fight at that time. A member
o. the majority stated yesterday that, I'M
ger the opinion Of Corporation Counsel
Humphrey that both amendments are un-
constitutional they win be promptly ta-
bied when they are brought up