Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1900-08-17
Thirteen Reasons Why the Railroad
Ordinance Should be Defeated.

|
Mr.. Editor II respectfully submit a num
Der of reasons why the ordinance in relation
to the Electric Railway should be reiecte,
by the taxpayers of Rockville:
While the ordinance ostensibly aims to
secure an even surface of rails and road way,
1t leaves wide discretion to the railway com
pany, by requiring this to be done where
practicable" The requirement should be
absolute, Railways are so constructed in
cities, and it can be done here Failure to
DO so at any one point might be serious
and wholly unnecessary detriment to abut
ting properties
3 The company is required to macadam-
ize between the rails and two feet each side
thereof, and TAT all times maintain said mac
adam" If, in the future, it becomes feast
BILE to pave the street with other material
the company can maintain this strip of mac
adam through the center of it as long as it
pleases. The ordinance should reserve the
right in the Mayor ana Council to require
such material to be used by the company rs
the general paving OF the street may render
necessary to furnish a uniform roadway.
3. The ordinance gives the company
free hand in the matter OF changing the
grades of the street. Definite information
should be furnished upon this subject, so
that the voters may determine the effect
upon their properties, and the advantages or
disadvantages to accrue to them by reason
of the exercise of this power This is too
serious power to be granted to a corpora
ton in ignorance of its intentions in the
premises
4 The ordinance permits the indefinite
storage of cars on the side track opposite
the Fair Grounds, to the Inconvenience and
damage of abutting properties.
B. Instead of protecting the rights and in
terests of the residents of the town by proper
safeguards, which would have been an easy
matter, the people are by this ordinance un
necessarily driven to the courts in expensive
litigation with a corporation, whenever their
rights are nvad ed
q. The ordinance practically surrenders
the police power which the Mayor and
Council should retain, in relation 10 the
speed OF cars. No matter what conditions
may arise In the future, this co npany will r. =
sist any attempt TO curtal its privileges in
this respect, as granted. Furthermore, there
should be "a provision for the prosecution
and punishment Of the agents and servants
OF the company who violate the provision
covering speed.
7 The company is guaranteed Eat all times
the free and uninterrupted use oi its road
way" and heavy penalties are provided
against those who interfere with IT, II the
road should be extended to the west end OF
town, this provision will entail great lucon
Venience upon persons in vehicles, and 90
pecially upon those with heavily laden
wagons. II will give the railway prac-
tical monopoly OF the narrow ptri- OF Com
meTce Street, and probably force travel by
the way of Back Lane or jefferson Street
These streets would become impossible in
the Winter and Spring seasons, aud the
town will be put 10 very considerable ex
pense to macadamlze them Yet the ordl-
nance makes no provision tor reimburse
ment by the company for an outlay which its
occupancy of the main street OF the town
will almost inevitably render necessary. la
Il word. the company gets what is Of great
value to it for nothing, while the toWn runs
the risk of enlarged expenditures and a
higher tax rate, with no return from the
party most benefited
g. While heavy penalties are imposed
upon those who interfere with the railroad,
OF are supposed to do so, the only penalty
imposed upon the company il the shadowy
one of having its privileges revoked Tor the
continued violation OF any OF the condi-
tons, regulations, restrictions, reservations
and requirements herein contained, after
due and reasonable notice" &c. Practically,
this is equivalent To no penalty nj all. AT
least it enables the company to enter upon
a long aud expensive litigation, Tor which II
has unlimited means and the town has no g.
8. There is no provision Tor the removal
OF the over head trOlly, IN case that step
should be necessary in the development of
the town or for the protection to its citizens,
or the advancement of electrical science
should render change from that system
practicable and just.
10. The ordinance changes the rule OF eV-
ldence in all controversies with the cOmpa-
ny growing out of damage TO person or
property, giving 10 the company 40 undue
advantage aud imposing upon the injured
an unnecessary hardship,
IL. Because the ordinance undertakes TO
grant the railroad free and uninterrupted
use Of the street. in conformation of the de
cison of the Court of Appeals OF Maryland,
in the case of Poole vs., Falls Road ailway
Company, 81 Md 533. Why should one of
our citizens be compelled TO go into thu
Courts and fight corporation on the ques
ton of the validity OF an ordinance that the
Council had no right To pass under the rule
laid down under the above deciaionY
II The ordinance makes no provision for
the removal OF the track and the restoration
of the street in case the franchise is forfeited.
The expense OF this would fail upon the
town.
10. Taken altogether, the ordinance gives
everything 10 the company and Reserves
nothing to the town However desirable
railway may be, II may be obtained, like
other Injuries, NJ too dear price,
Some of these DbipctInns NAV not be OF