The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-11-08

control over the streets and having The right to
| grant or refuse its consent TO their use by a
street railway COMPANY, has authority TO prescribe
| the terms and conditions upon which a railway
| company may construct and operate a railway on
| its streets 1t may exact license fec Tor the use
| Of the streets. II may impose any condition not
forbidden by the statute. II can he compelled TO
| remove snow from its tracks and to keep its road
| In such state of repair as not to interfere with
| persons Using the public way. II Is the duty Of
| the company TO the public TO employ competent
and s,fricn, servants; aud in case. at least.
Il was held that electric street railway companies
| shall sipplv their cars with a conductor as we'll
| as motornan.
In the case Of Ioder vs.. Brooklyn ticighte Rail
| wav company. II was held by the supreme court
OF New York that a street railway company should
80 operate its lines as will best promote The con.
rcncrcc and benefit OF tho public; and II has
authority 20 cease tho operation OF its road simply
hoac,sc Of the fact that 1t cannot ob'i employees
20 run its cars al the prices or upon tho oondi.
| tions which 1t offers. II owes the public the duty
Of keeping its line in opcriiou and ii it cannot
obtain employees upon the terms offered by it, H. IL
under the obligation Of offering such tcms and
conditions will enable IL to obtain the ncces-
sarv labor, without regard 10 the effect upon The
dividends oi tho company.
II was also held IN Chicago case that a street
, railway company should he operated and main.
tined in such manncr as will best promote and
aid public travel.
In relation to your second question. can find
no authority TO annu franchise which has been
granted by the city Of scranton 20 any OF the
companies which are today being operated under
the Scranton Railway charter
Tic councils did not impo>c conditions at ihn
time o. granting The privilege Of the streets. ly
which such step could he taken. even II it
would be warranted b., the law TO proceed against
them TO annnl a franchise They have agreed 10
do nothing. The councils doma.dnd nothing; and
SO Tar as | am able to observe the company is
keeping IL, agreement faithfully M reservation
having been made. II is very difficult TO say how
could proceed TO annul franchise which has
not been violated. Proceedings might be had 10
compel the company TO run its cars. and unless
they ran make good and sufficient answer. they
would ic obliged 10 do 80. no matter at what cost
TO them
In answer TO Your third question. in relation 10
thc purchase Of the system by the city of Scran.
ton: this is iinpacticablc. In the f,s place. you
could not force the traction company to sell; and.
in the next place. the city OF Scranton could not
buy at any price under The present financial con.
dition of thr city. We have no means of raising
money sufficient TO acquire. at reasonable price.
tlc Scranton Railway c0inpanya property: and IL
is very doubtful proposition whether Or not the
road could I've operated by the city OF Scranton.
u'ier The city charter even ii i. were possible ior
t'r city to own it. The city has right to
n"'n III ''' '''''' .''',""' '"''''"S, "' ""'
tlinl; anything be done toward the puroliIs
ing "' "''t''''s VI ''' S''''' '"' '.'''' '' '"e
city Of Scranton under present conditions.
ABOUT QUALIFICATIONS.
r. ,o,,,i,, ., ,,rr ,,,ri, s,ri,ct n, ;rcu;r,
to,.i;., H., ,i,,,i -, oar,,n,. 10 fy , stonl,r1 -,
,,r,,tr,1.i,r, ~. ,ri.h e., .,,oo, ,o;,,va, ,,m.
,,,. siaiI h, o,a,roI =; ,Io or,,,oy,,o,. ~ NOR.
engaged in the ruung OF cars:
,.,t J., a. -, W, o,'I;s,..;o, Co., a,,'