The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-01-17

ana sunday travsl ID me la,ras ina pxsks
the cheap fare offered BY . trnn4er sy6tem
will double and treble that cIaas Of travel
without Increasing n any Ike proportion
the expens< Of 0per2tion Hence tho total
rtsult IN cash to the consolidated company
would be greater than at present. This
YOU practically admit when you state that
the , per cent. revenue would mean at
least $4,000 annually At once and with ordi-
nary increase OF business II may rise to
$4,000 or 1000 the nrst year" Or in other
words YOU say that the gross revenues,
now 100000 per year. would, under con-
solidatton and q universal transfer system.
probably rise to $75O,O00 or 81 900 900 the first
year. Under such conditions does any
one doubt that the consolidated company
will inaugurate a transfer system under
their existing franchises? They are not to
be blamed for using It together with poor
service and no revenue as plea for Sc
curing q great concession. but the people
cannot be blamed for refusing to sit quiet
ly by and see their birthrigft sold for such
a mess Of pottage. This review has
reached such lengths that i dare not at
tempt at this time an answer to your de-
NAL Of municipal ownership as a REM
edy, and your bare assertion that ''pur-
chase Is out of the question:" These sys-
tens can be duplicated for 5000, 900. Their
consolidation has already been announced
In your columns as justifying a capitaliza-
tion OF six and a quarter millions. Whence
comes the more than four million dollars
Of surplus over value of plant? Is It not
represented by the existing franchises?
And will 1t not be greatly Increased by the
adding Of another twenty years right to
control the monopoly after the expiration
OF the remaining fifteen7 This franchise
value belongs to the people Of Seattle and
will come to them within fifteen wears
without o dollars cost. 1t Is the resource
with which we can meet our three ana a
quarter millions of city debt which will
fall due about that time. 1t presents the
assurance of ability to reduce fares to the
limit of reasonable cost Of efficient SER
vice. If any existing franchise is forfeit
ed for inefficient service before expiration,
does any one doubt the inability Of the
city of Seattle to finance the construction
and operation of that particular line on a
basis of actual cost Of construction. no
watered stock. and no allowances for pro-
motors and lobbyists? When municipal
ownership comes-and the progress OF the
age demands H--it will be by the gradual.
progressive and safe requirement Of exist
ing lines by honest and deserved forfeit
ure or by an equitable purchase.
I raise my voice as a citizen against
this proposition to saddle blanket fran
ciise upon this and the next generation
because after full Investigation, as bust
ness proposition, / see in 1t nothing to
gain and everything to lose. l oppose It
because know no right In this generation
to bind the hands and barter the prosperity
of that which is to follow. see in 1t a
Clear and direct attempt to violate or
evade the will of the people as laid down
in their city charter, that no franchise
shall be extended until within three years
of its expiration. There are many rea-
sons why + should have preferred to re-
main silent upon this proposition but as
the project seems to approach consumma-
ton, believing as do that the granting
of this franchise would be a surrender of
the future of Seattle to private tribute,
l have felt 1t citizens duty to state the
case to other citizens who may not have
had the same opportunities to investigate.
that they with me may cali upon the city
respectfully, GEO. f. COTTERILL.