Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-10-01
RAILWAY SITUATION.
THE CITY ATTORNEYS OPINION
CHANGES 1T.
WHAT SOME COUNCILMEN THINK.
Position OF the Boyd-Newton syndi-
cate In the Race said to Have Inn
proyed-Text of MIR. II. X. Poiiard's
Opinion.

Opinion.
Some members OF the City Council have
expressed the belief that the opinion OF
the City Attorney in regard to the street
railway franchises, and particularly that
clause Of It which deals with the inability
OF the city TO buy the property pertaining
to the Main-street line in accordance with
the terms OF an ordinance passed in 1865,
will very materially influence the Coun-
ell in dealing with the petitions OF the
Boyd-Newton syndicate. the Richmond
Traction Company. and the Jenkins syn
dicate.
They argue that since the City Attor-
ney has backed UP his opinion with
statement that the Legislature may not
have the power to amend the charter so
as TO admit of the purchase by the city.
there must inevitably follow complica-
lions. and that the probabilities all point
TO litigation and the consequent tying up
of the company. The disposition seems
TO be TO accept the nearest solution TO
the whole matter. ana there are some
councilmen who do not hesitate To say
that the position Of the Boyd-Newton
syndicate in the race for the franchises
has been materially improved. The ac-
ceptance of the proposition OF this syDdi-
cate would, II Is suggested by some. OBJ
viate all unpleasantnes5 with the old
company. and might also dispose Of the
claim against The old company for dam
age done by electrolysis. which has been
found 10 exist all over the old company's
system.
THE CITY ATTORNEYS OPINION
The text Of the City Attorneys opinion
is as follows:
Richmond. Va. September q, 500.
To Committee on Streets:
Gentlemcn,-ln response to your request
TO report "as to existence of franchises
railway and the city's rights i'm regard
thereto ! beg to submit as completely
answering your inquiry the following quo
tauOn from the opinion Of my predecessor
CNlr. G.. Y. Meredith. given you in re-
Spouse 20 a similar resolution. (See opin-
ions Of city Attorney. pages %, ", and
October /, 1897.
To the Committee on Streets:
Gentlemcu.-I am in receipt OF your
communication, submitting TO me tho fol-
lowing inquiries:
l. The date OF the expiration Of the
franchise of the Richmond City Railway
COMPANY.
Q what notice, # any. tho city is re-
qurcd TO give this company before the
expiration Of its franchise.
g. The terms upon which the city can
take back the franchise, and upon what
terms the franchise may be let out to any
person in respect TO the present owners
of the franchise.
(. Has the present Council the right 10
put ont the franchise.
3. Any other matter that the City At
tOrney may think necessary TO report upon
this question.
i'm reply 10 your first inquiry, I have to
state that the routes of all Of the routes q
the Richmond City Railway Company will
not expire on the same date. BY the
9th section OF chapter 50 or the city Or
dinauccs. 1850. all Of It's routes in exist
ence at the time said compilation of city
Ordinances was adopted and which have
not been subsequently, surrendered, eX-
pire ON the 51st day Of December,
1900. All of its routes granted since 1889.
and now in use expire on the lst DAY OF
January. 1850, except the northern track
or Broad street which the company ac-
QUired from the Richmond, FrederIcNs-
burg and Potomac Railroad Company,
and which the company uses with the
power I'm the Council 20 revoke lc at any
time. The routes which expire on the
3let Coy Of December, 1900, are as iol-
lows: Main street from Rockets street
streets. from Main 20 Broad; single track
on Broad. from Ninth 20 Laurel, and on
Laurel. from Broad To Main.
1hACho W HlCh H-\Iti'I JA-NC-AI'
-ST
The tracks which ovriro January I. 1920
ara as follows. From Racl,.tls and Main
DOW, rCrlatts fo FuIt1u. ON Main. from
I,.,er,0ir no. c.ruofate limits. and Holly
wood extension from Laurel and Main.
Your second. third. and Fourth inquiries
can be answered by showing what bear
12s the l"eiIie seetoA Oh Zen. cLtp'tt 49, Sl,S
~ u-! dl'-'s ~, N,51i. Dag ''I, 49,, -', 80
ilal t-L' l -. ,',f ms, ,i,i...-l.
$50. ~ s1r.,tI5 st.t .,-if.ti ~ a.,
l-,.-.4.t,-7's a-,f ,,-1,.i.forr of' CIanIor IL
~ tFe f,t,. or,iir-. .,oe. and oil lin. amend
,--e-f- hrrefofora afor..l thereto" Tn-
iii tra cofupflrtiou of the ordinances il
1859. that section W4s never attached 10
th. ordnance of December n. 1865. under
which the company acquired its earlier
routes Bot section Z Of the ordnance
of December IL. 1<f5. does embCdy iu sub-
stance and erect The same provisions,
and reads as follows. ". Iu an Other
respect the said company shall ice poF-
C-u,I pv ina aforesaid ordinance PASSED
ou the 18th day OF March, ls5J.'
The ordinance OF December II. 1855, in
Itself contained no provisions 9s 10 what
snail De done aI inc expiration or tne
franchises but Do secllon ~ or sald oIoi-
nance OF l5in or Maith, wv Dy lle pro-
VISIONS or winch IS we nave JUST seem
inc company shli DC 69teiLe1, PROVE
e.on Us MADE az ta W-at we cry SILL
c-s'-l me wv ~ is.5 Ia eame a. tb6