The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-08-09
SEEKERS AFTER truth
COMMERCIAL CLUB COMMITTEE GOES
OVER FRANCHISES.
objections Raised by Former Judge
Mcbride and George j. MarOtt
Given Consideration.
A PROPHECY NOT AUTHORIZED
1T is THAT NO AMENDMENTS WILL
BE INSISTED UPON.
Members of the Committee Wish
Themselves in Canada-Other
Municipal Affairs.

The Commercial Club committee, COM
posed of John w. Kern, Charles w. Smith
and Frank f. Gavin, which was appointed
to examine the franchise of the Indianapo-
lis Traction and Terminal Company and the
franchises of the eight interurban roads
now before the Council, met last night at
the Office of Mr.. Kern to continue its dis
cussion, which began yesterday morning.
Besides the committee, Ferdinand Winter.
attorney for the Indianapolis Traction and
Terminal Company. City Attorney Joss and
Frank L. LittIeton were present. Mr.. Lit
Teton has record of unbroken attendance
al all interurban meetings. He represents
the shippers committee and his presence
last night was to ask a revision of the
freight provision of the interurban fran
chise so as to strike out the minimum
charge of so per cent. on the steam road
rates. He wants the provision left that
they will be required, under penalties al
ready provided. to compete with all other
common carriers of freight without the
protection of the so per cent. minimum. The
committee, however. had discussed the
freight clause at the the morning session
and ii received no attention last night.
When adjournment was taken none of the
participants except Mr.. Kern, who is chair
man OF the committee would discuss the
subjects before the committee. Mr.. Kern
said the committee had reached no conclu-
sion, but would meet again to-day and
doubtless prepare a report. He said, conf
dentially, that the committee had not with
any particular enuSiVeneSS blessed the
circumstances that made them members of
il. Two members first appointed-J. Z.
Scott and r. o. Hawkins-are in Canada
and could not serve. Mr.. Kern intimated
that the present members would enjoy
Canadian life about as much as anything
just now.
OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED.
He said the committee had considered the
objections Of former Judge Mcbride and
Mr.. Marott and had compared the fran
chises and also analysed the language of
the Terminal franchise and the con-
tracts of the interurban companies. The
Terminal Company's franchise was
first considered, and Mr.. Winter and
Mr.. Joss explained the motive and rea-
son for all the provisions of that document.
They were with the committee nearly two
hours. They also explained the intent of all
the interurban provisions. When they left
Mr.. Joss said they had told the committee
that, unless substantial amendment was
necessary, they old not believe the fran
chiSeS should be amended. But If the COM
mittee found that it was necessary to
amend any of the provisions that they
would be ready to assist. The argument of
both was that the franchises as at present
worded safeguard the city and at the same
time secure all the rights and privileges
granted and intended To be granted, and en-
danger in no way the citys rights under
the indianapolis Street-railway Company S
franchise, through the provided absorption
of IL by the Terminal Company.
One member of the committee proposed
that the committee decide where amend
ments might be desirable and then, having
reduced the question to this basis. decide
whether these amendments were of suffi-
cient Importance to justify the interruption
of the passage of the franchise by the
Council and the return of the franchise to
the Board OF Public Works. All the mem
| berS had ideas as to different construction
| of particular sentences, but all of these
We're not vital in the opinion of all. The
| probable result of the committees work
/ will be that, while the members find pro-
| visions that might be elucidated OF
| strengthened by changes, the subjects in
| volved are not of Importance and would
| work no mischief in the future construction
| of the document. To this prophecy, how
| ever, the members of the committee would
| not give authority.
MIR. WINTER HEARD.
A considerable portion of the committee
session was devoted to the points raised
by Mr.. Mcbride. Mr.. Winter was heard
fully in regard to them, but no opinions
were expressed by the members of the
| committee. Mr.. Mcbride reiterates his
statements that the construction of the
| Terminal Companys contract leaves nc
/
| of the annual tax of $4,000 if it acquires
/ the property of the Indianapolis Street
| railway Company. He asserts that the
very sentence that Ferdinand Winter in.
| serted to protect the city against such q
/ construction is the very one that makes
/ it the logical construction. Mr.. Winter
/ still holds that his sentence clearly pro
! vides that the Terminal Company is obi
/ gated TO pay this sum with the added pen
atty of forfeiture of its franchise for fail
! ure.
| The committee also considered George ]
! Marotts latest discovery in regard to the
| Union Traction Company. He asserts thai
/ under law passed by the Legislature in
| 1901 the Union Traction Company may con
| sOlidate with another company and thu:
| rid itself of the tax now fixed in its fran
| chise. This tax is now cents for the frs
| period. Is for the second and % for tn,
| third for each car run into the city b,
| consolidating with a smaller company
| which il is proposed to tax only 5, and il
| cents for the three periods, the Union Com
| pany, he says, could escape the heavy ia,
| which il now accepts.
! After going over the whole field all tn,
| members of the committee decided the,
| wanted to sleep over their decision /
| seemed as If they all had their minds mad,
| up, but wanted TO think well before ex
| pressing them. At to-day's meeting il il
| not likely that the committee will fail I,
! agree on report.