The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1900-03-24
OPPOSED TO THE TRACK.
Owners of Office Property on Bay
street Protest.

street trOtest.
The strongest and hardest kick yet made
against granting a franchise FOR a steam
railroad track on Bay street was brought
TO the attention of Council last night
The protest is from Inc owners and agents
OF owners of the office property on the
north side of Bay street, and also the
agent for the Board of Trade building
The sigma lures attached TO the petition
are Joseph D. Weed, attorney in fact for
the estate of John L. Hardee. John Elan
merry & Co, agents for the estate of Eu-
gene Kelly, Julian Schley, agent for the
Board OF Trade building Isabelle Waples.
John |. Stoddard, II. M. Stoddard, w. J.
DeRenne, and A. II. Stoddard
Inc petition discusses the question of
the Bay street franchise at length and
presents some very forcible arguments
asainst it. The protest applies only 10 the
eastern end OF Bay street, and is based
almost entirely upon the evil results aD-
pretended to the office property on that
end OF the street should steam railroa
track be given the right of way. 1t is
held that this will forever ruin all pros
poets of renting hereafter any property
on that street for office purposes ana
WlH Drive away all present occupants of
business offices now there"
me arguments OF those who claim that
a railroad track would be ''the salvation
OF the street." are met with lengthy re-
view OF the very undesirable results 10
the owners of the buildings on the north
side OF Bay street which have result ID
from the construction and operation of the
River street track. 1t was claimed il is
stated that the track on River street
would be the salvation of the warehouses
there. ON the contrary the warehouses
have become almost vaIueless and can
hardly be rented for any purpose
Moreover says the petition, "the con-
slant blocking of the street. the noise ana
rumble Of passing trains. the ringing of
bells' ana dense volumes of smoke from
soft coal pouring inlo the upper windows
of offices above that street, have render
ed all the Offices much less desirable than
they were before the road was built"
me following interesting statement is
made: In this connection it might be well
to state that the city has none but squat
ter's title 10 River street anyhow as the
deeds TO the property on the north side of
Bay street read, from the river south. in
Guiding wharves streets and buildings;
and River street has never been decided 10
the city by the owners any more than the
Strand has for many of the deeds read
from the river TO Bay street This point
is likely to be brought up some day"
1t is held that the River street track
sale grocers, and that the same state of
affairs would result should a track be
allowed on Bay street. ruin to the proper
ty of others without benefit to any line of
business. The supporters of the measure
are challenged to produce a single in
stance where a railroad track through a
business or resident street of any city
has proved anything but disastrous to the
property on that street. The case of
Washington, d. c., is especially cited as
glaring instance of the damage
wrought by permitting railroad tracks in
city streets.
II is urged that the railroads are not
seeking this privilege for the purpose of
delivering goods to the merchants on the
street. That their object is simply to Sc
cure the right-of-way across the city, and
that this once secured the tracks will
be found to be irremovabe and the con-
ditions and restrictions imposed will be
fought down one by one, as is the ma
ture Of railroads, and the citizens will
| be powerless while their property will
| have been DESTROYED