The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1901-02-05
NULE-CAR FIGHT
BEFORE COUNCIL.
Matter Causes a Wrangle
in Early Morning
TO LAY NEW TRACKS.
Old Company to Buy One From lrac-
ton Company.
USE OF THE JENKINS SYSTEM.
C,itv-Attorncy Meredith Submits n
Careful Opinion Bearing on the
Right OF the Council to
REQUIRE Its Usc-Other
Busiucss Before
the Bo,ly.
USE OF THE JENKINS SYSTEM.

r;r,., s,reet and the mule car ltue
,,,,re discussed pro and con last night
a,a carly this morning before the Com
mon Council both by able ana oise'ii-
-,ished counsel and by the members OF
| that body.
/. The Traction Company and the Passeii-
! ,cr aud Power Company We're pitted
,,i,st each other, and ii was a tug OF
| war
Mr. Charles Y. Meredith very ably pre-
| sented the rights of the Traction Cont
many on Eighth Street and Captain ~ o.
C,ufeon. with as much ability. the side oil
| the Passenger and Power Company CAP
/ tain G,,ison was assisted by Mr.. Miles NJ.
| Martin. and MIR Meredith received many
valuable suggestions from Mr.. BemisS and
| Mr.. Lancaster Williams
| The Adams ordinance expressing ths
| wishes of the Traction Company WAS
! passed unanimously, but only after 1t hatd
| received important amendments. which
! brought it much nearer TO the wishes OIL
| the Passenger and Power people
| The result of the action will be to allow
the Traction people to continue without
! interruption their work down Eighth
/ Street to prevent the further operation
! of the mule cars. and to eventually give
each company the ownership of one track
on Eighth Street with the privilege of
using the track of the other company
! The communication from City Attorney
/ Pollard on the subject of the Jenkins I'M
derground system Main Street is eX-
! ecedingly important. and will receive the
! attention of the Council at a later meet
| ing It counseIS further investigation of
| the practicablity and efficiency of the sys-
| TEN before the Council commits itself by
| passing the ordinance.
/ THE SESSION IN DETAIL.
! President Ebel presided and the other
member: present We're Messrs- Allen.
Adams, Bloomberg Camp, Cottrell, Curtis,
| CARRIER, Gibson. Glenn. Csunst. Hobson.
| Mccarthy Peters Pollock. Mills Shea,
! s-eefn. Tanner Teefey. WaIierstein. West.
| Whalen, Williams. Winston and Woody.
| The Street Committee brought in seve-
| raj resolutions providing for small
| amounts of sranoiithic pavement in differ
| ent parts of the city, which We're acted on
! favorably until the question OF IL Srano-
| lithic pavement OF Fourteenth Street, be-
| tween Main and Cary Streets, was
I reached. when there hitch. as four
teen of tie abutting property owners
| don't want Il new sidewalk. The discus
sion on this point brought out the views
| of ,NIessrs Peters. Adams. Wallerstein.
| Pollock. Mills Woody. CARRIER and Btoom-
berg. The motion was carried, and a mo-
ton to reconsider lost by l6 to Il
GAS FOR THE MISSION.
The question OF giving 50.GGo cubic feet
| of gas without charge to the Methodist
| City Mission was discussed MI Miner
| argued against thu resolution on the
ground that the proposition was denomi-
| national Mr. Wallersteiu favored the res
| olution. and it was adopted-26 TO j.
] 4 communication was read from the
J Board OF Public Interests as 10 iurnisn-
| ing the virginfa-North Carolina Wheel
/, Works lprser water facilities. Referred
! TO Committee on Water
| CITY ATTORNEY S OPINION
/ City Attorney H. L. FoIlard, upon re-
/ quest presented 10 the councit a report
| on the legal aspects OF the ordinance re-
| auiriu@ the Passenger ana rover ,ofhpa-
| ny to use the underground trolley system,
| The opinion follows:
| January 18th, 1901
| To the Honorable Common Couiica Oh
/ the city of Richmond
| EenrIemen-By your request, | have uh-
| dor considera ton an inquiry, made oy d
| resolution OF your honorable DOGGY, oil
| January l. 1901 requesting me TO iilioinh
/ Won whether the city mas the risht |"
| 20 g. an ordinance reported from the COM
/ rIitf
| or system by which electricity may Ne
/ nsed in certain streets by the Richmond
| passenser and Power CoIapany, etc, ana
| If il has the right, is sad ord!nahcs III
! Droner FORM and whether there VIII oe
| any liability on the city under lne stt1o
| ordinance If passed TO whrch l peg 10
| rasnond ms follows: Your inquiry re-
| solves itself into three questions. which
,i1l be STATED and answered in order.
Hos the city Il right TO pass the
ORDNANCE The answer TO this question
! must depend upon the fact whe.her the
| particular system tjenklhs s.lec1ticai
I-rferrround Trolley Systemt required
to be instasled by the Richmond Passen-
ger and Power Company by the proposed
ordfnauce is a practical. efficient and
ecnnomical system by which electricity
NAV be used as a motive power II IL Is I
a practical efficient and economical syss-
rem by which motive power may De ap-
nlied 10 the propulsion of street-cars, then
7 answer the question in the affirmative.
for Ithe. ordinance granting a franchiSs
TO the Richmond Passenger and Power
Company Gsec 3. ordinances 1s9S-l9fe. p-
,2eA expressly provides that the city re-
serves ..the righ1 TO put further eondi-
tions restriction and regulations as TO the
use of electricity and requirements as 10
the manner system by Which cleo
trfcitv may be used by the Richmond
! passerger and Power Company But.
II it is not practical. efficient. and
economical system for the application OF
electricity as a motive power. then an
swer the question in the negative; for the
courts would undoubtedly hold that an
ordinance which required the application
of scme particular system which was not
known to be practical. efficient and eco
nonical, was unreasonable. Now. whether
the system is question tJenIins Electrical
Underground Trolley SEstem1 is a practi-
cat efficien. and economical system, is
an engineering question which am not
competent TO decide, and on which ex-
press no opinion But, in view of the fact
that the Richmond Passenger and Power