The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-04-17
LIVE STOCK COMPETITION
ORDINANCE DANGEROUS To GROWTH
OF THIS BUSINESS KILLED.
IL Would Not Have Protected Union
other Municipal Matters.

Forsaken BY its original sponsor. coun-
Gilman Negley. the s~tockyards ordinance
was killed b. the committee on public
safety and comfort last night. Five mem
bers OF the committee were present, and
four-Sourbier. Mcfarland. Negley and
WahI-signed a recommendation that the
ordinance do not pass. Wysong refused
TO sign the report. It seems that the
sweeping provisions of the ordinance had
not been comprehended. even by Mr.. Neg
ley. who introduced it. The measure sought
l. prohibit the location, erection, construc-
tion or building hereafter Of s~tockyards
within the corporate limits Of indianapolis,
and also to prohibit the carrying on OF the
general business Of handling. feeding, sell
ing OF otherwise disPOsing Of EOgs, cattle
sheep or other live stock Of any kind by
s~tockyards that might have been estab-
lished In the future.
AIr. Sourbier. the chairman of the com
mittee, had gone into the ordinance pretty
thoroughly. and he announced some time
ago his intention TO vote against it. 1t
would tend, he said at that time, to do
away with competition in the live stock
business in this city. and it's results could
not fail 10 be prejudicial to business. Fur
ther Investigation Of the matter confirmed
Mr.. SOurbier's opposition.
Mcfarland and VAIL, after reading the
ordinance carefully. said that If it were
passed it would enectually bar from this
city any firm or individual that might de-
sire to 90 into the stock business. What
Indianapolis needed, they said. was not
ordinances to keep people from going into
business. but TO induce them TO enter bust
ness. SOurbier declared that the ordinance
Was nnfnfnU W0nra than CnapfaI 1aUfG1affnn
not for the benefit Of the public. but to
serve the ends Of certain established insti-
tutions. 81 have heard IL said in some
quarters, said he, that this measure is
nothing less than infamous" Mcfarland
said that he would be tempted, should the
measure 20 through Council. to introduce
an ordinance providing that no one should
hereafter enter the transfer business. Sour
bier said he had as much right to introduce
an ordinance prohibiting anyone establish
Ing a grocery as the promoters of the
stOckyards ordinance had TO introduce it.
TRIED TO HOLD UP UNION YARDS.
Wysong explained the reason the Council
Is asked to pass 1t. II know from expert
ence," he said. that there have been at
least two attempts to hold up the Union
Stockyards Company by threats to estab-
lish competing yards. There is a great
chance for INSCRIPTIONS people to compel
the Union yards to pay them to keep out
OF business. The ordinance was introduced
for the purpose of protecting one of the
most valuable of the city's business institu-
tons"
Negley questioned thai the ordinance
would protect the company IL passed. "A
competing yards could get grounds outside
the city limits and be just as dangerous
as it would be inside he said. Wysong
admitted the force of the argument. Il
would suggest" added Negley, that an or
dinance requiring consent Of Council TO the
establishment Of a yards be passed. That
would serve TO protect existing yards and
at the same time would not act as a bar to
legitimate competition"
The also refused to m
a resolution introduced recently by Coun-
Gilman Rhodes. The resolution is as fol-
lows: BE II resolved by the Common Coun-
-cn, that the Board Of Public Works is
hereby requested that in granting any fran
chise In the future when the use OF poles
or supports for wire are necessary that IL
compel the use of poles or support already
erected as far as practicable; and in grant
ing any franchise that the joint use of poles
or supports shall be enforced" Mr..
RhOdes's idea in bringing the resolution to
the attention of Council was that too many
wires are being strung over the streets and
that the board should make two or three
companies In the same business use the
same poles or supports. The mmi re-
fused TO favor the resolution because il
would have seemed. it said. an unwarrant-
able encroachment upon the Jurisdiction Of
the Board Of Public Works.
Mr.. Negley lectured for "A few minutes
upon the subject Of What is included in
the functions OF the various departments
OF the city government" He said IL would
not look we'll for the Council to tell the
Board OF Works what il must or must not
do. II was all right for members to go TO
the board as citizens and say what they
thought, but TO act officially would be out
side the limits Of official courtesy. The
other members of the committee took the
same view.
It will take another meeting of the COM
mittee 10 dispose of Billin gsley's ordinance
for the regulation and inspection of scales,
weights and measures. The ordinance was
read by the committee last night and senti-
ment seemed TO be in favor OF recommend
ing II, but IL was thought best to have
more time 10 look into the various provi-
sions. Some objection was raised TO the
provision that requires the city 10 maintain
horses and wagons for the use of inspec-
tors. Negley said that a man with a 81, 200
Job ought TO be able to keep his own horse
and wagon.