The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-01-03
REPLY TO Mr.. CONNELL.
William H. Taylor Makes Answer to
Statements Contained in the Let
ter Printed Wednesday.

4 lie IOlIOWlnR letIer answering the
open letter of William Connell, printed
in Wednesdays Tribune, has been
handed to us by its writer with request
for its publication and is published as
q. matter of courtesy:
Scranton, Pa, Jan. 2, 1909.
Hon. William Connell, City.
Sir: The statements in your open letter, pub.
lished in yesterday mornings papers, like all
similar efforts to "throw dust in the eyes of the
public" are not only misleading. but in so far
as they might be intended as an attack upon my
integrity, or in any manner question the entire
disintcrcstcdness OF my actions in connection
with the present franchise question, they are
wilfully, maliciously and wickcdly false, and !
therefore make the following statements:
l. Allow me to state that ! do not now hold.
nor never had dollars interest in any enter.
prise which has sought or obtained from this
city any special public franchise.
9. i am not now, nor have I at any time been
directly or indirectly interested, in any manner
whatsoever, in any of the companies or organ-
zations that have may make tender Of any
kind to the city for the franchises now being
asked for by your companies, or any other fran
chses.
3. No article published which in any manner
reflects untruthfully upon yourself or your com
panies has emanated from me.
4. have dealt and shall continue to deal
solely with the proposition: The city's in.
terests must be protected and the city receive
adequate returns for favors granted
D. You state that "The ordinances as original
ly drawn made n number of concessions 10 the
public interest such as have never been made by
any other similar companies in the city
What concession to the public interest did your
ordinances originally drawn offer when com.
pared with the offers contained in the ordinance
of Common Council, No. 81. 1901, granting GER
tain franchises to the Ccntral Rapid Transit
Street Railway company?
6. In relation to the payment of street grad.
ing damages do you consider that your com.
panies made any concession TO the city. after
their having first admitted to the gentlemen in
conference that the cost of all grading. includ-
ing damages to abutting property owners, had
been included in their estimated cost OF the
construction Of the road. and that the same
was to be paid for out of proceeds from sale of
securities to be issued by your company?
.. II, as stated by you, There has not been
a time since their charters We're granted when
the owners of them could not have sold them
out to the Scranton Railway company for sums
very much larger than those represented by the
bluffing offers of more less responsible per-
sons who rushing into the public print"
then you admit that the charter rights alone are
worth in excess OF 100000. If then the charter
rights alone are worth in excess of Sl0OOOO what
would the same charter rights he worth after
being perfected by the granting OF the fran
rhises for which you ask?
s. viii You explain to the public why, ii your
were originally willing to grant the
city what has since been conceded. your repre-
'entatives took the position on The Thursday
night Just before the ordinances were first in
roduccd that you had the votes 10 pass the
finances and would therefore decline to grant
my postponement in order that the ordinances
night be carefully examined and amended in
he interests OF the city?
0. Did the committee OF the board Of trade
iavc any opportunity Of discussing with your
the rate OF tax YOU finally offered T?
On the contrary, is 1t not true that you put
hat in as an utimatum without opportunity or
ime for conference after you had decided upon |
he same? Under such conditions do You attempt
o state that the committee as a whole. any
Individual member Of the same, is not at liberty |
o make proper effort TO secure what they deem |
rightful rate of taxation be tore the franchises |
re finally granted?
10. You state, 'If the ordinances are passed |
) they now stand in council the promoters will |
tand by their agreement and build the road" |
Viii you back that statement by agreeing to |
ec TO it that the city is secured by legal |
accompanied by bond of proper |
mount, that the roads will be built within the
Ine named IN the ordinances, II the ordinances |
re passed as they now stand!
H. II YOU are honestly solcitous for The wei.
arc Of the city and still realize, as YOU state
II your letter that 'Onc of the most urgent |
emands for the prosperity OF Scranton was a
ew and efficient street railway system" then are
on going to take the position that unless the
rdinances are passed as they now stand. whether
not the city received from responsible parties
bonatide offer better than Your companies are
repaired or willing to make TO The city, in that
vent 'yonr company will simply refuse 10
ccept them and retain their charters" and
nus take away, according TO your own state.
tent, the only opportunity that the city has
ad or can have for years to come to secure an
fcient and adequate street railway SYSTEM?
II this is your intention, then are you study.
" the city's interest or your own?
IL. Conferences with the Scranton Railway |
'mpany: Believing that the present was an
oportune time to secure from the Scranton Rail
ay company concessions due the city, | have
id four conferences with the representatives Of
le Scranton Railway company, and as result
those conferences l have secured from that
'mpany voluntary concessions as to taxes on
eir gross earnings taxes greater than your com
my absolutely refused to grant That conccs-
on is now in my possession in the form OF
tier, which, If | am permitted so to do, will
read before the councils tonight
13. ! am not now, nor have I at any time been
'posed to the granting of the franchises to yonr
mpanies provided that the roads viii he built
ID the interests OF the city at the time of the
anting OF the franchises properly guarded
ID fair returns made To the city for favprs,