The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1901-04-25
City Council Refuses to Grant a New
Route to the Ken0sha Street
Railway Company.
SOME STIRRING SCENES ENACTED
Dignity of Council is Thrown to the Winds
and The Aldermen Indulge in
Sharp Personalities.

The Kenosha Street Railway Com
pany will not have a monopoly of the
str Gets of Kenosha. This fact was
finally decided last night when the
council by vote of nine to seven re-
fused to grant the ordinance granting
the company the right to change their
route so as to include West Main
street. The discussion of the merits
of the ordinance brought out the most
stirring debate of years on the floor
of the council and several times the
lobby were forced to applaud the sharp
personalities of the different alder
men. The language of the aldermen
was painted and not altogether elegant
or dignifed, but it showed intense OPP
position to any monopoly. In many
cases the language used was dis
grace to the Council and the Mayor or
Chief of Police should have suppressed
it. The matter was brought up when
the special committee brought in a re-
port favoripg the change of route aud
the passage of the ordinance Alder
man Weier at once moved that the re-
port be laid upon the table and alder
man Schend moved the amendment
that the report be accepted. There
came a discussion. Alderman Schlen-
ker spoke against the acceptance of
the report of the committee, and asked
the committee a pertinent "why."
Tu11ey attempted to explain and said
that a majority of the property owners
on Fremont avenue had demonstrated
against the road. O'Brien didn't say
much-just, "Not by a damned sight"
and his protest was echoed by voice
from the lobby who was opposed to
the change. Alderman O'Brien then
protested against the change, dec1ar-
ing that the Milwaukee company had
consented to macadamize the street
and that it was his opinion that the
Kenosha company should be forced to
do the same thing. Alderman K1eist
made his maiden effort in the council
declaring against the granting of,
monopoly to the company. The speech
applause, which showed that the lobby
was opposed to the change.
President Arnold of the company,
backed by Pat Haynes, and attorneys
Dorr and Mcdowell, was in a ConCi1a-
tory mood and talked all around the
] question, throwing the delay for the
building of the road and the delay Of
the bridge on the council and the
different committees. O'Brien and
Sch1enker made many personal re-
marks and comments to Mr.. Arnold,
| but the discussion did not bring the
parties nearer together. Aldermen
Dale and Anderson also addressed the
council on the railway matter, and
alderman Weier spoke against the
road in spirited discussion which
was punctuated by O'Brien throwing
in such EXPLANATIONS as ''and offered
money" wanted to buy" "sneaking
out of it'' and.other such expressions.
Sch1enker asked Arnold if he had a
right of way south of. Kenosha and
| Arnold said that he had. Sch1eDker
retorted "By God doubt it." He said
that the promoters of the road were
simply playing for time in which to
sell the stock or water the stock.
These soft impeachments were denied
by Mr.. Arnold in no uncertain words
and declared that the a1derman's state
ments were in error.
With an hours discussion of the
matter the report of the committee was
laid on the table by a vote of nine to
seven.
This action of the council left the
railway company without a leg to
stand on and it is hard to see what fu-
ture action will be taken. The COM
pany will not. at the present time, be
allowed monopoly of the streets of
the city and they must now build on
the original ordinance or else enter in
to another controversy with the city
council.