The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-02-05
Chairman Bennett Says Commissions
Will Proceed, as Planned, 10 Reach
Its Conclusions.
MAY URGE AN AMENDMENT
REPRESENTATIVE BAMBERGER To
PUSH ELEVATION LAW.
Supreme Court Holds the City May
Not, without Additional Power.
Require Elevation.

The ordinance passed by the Council in
1899 requiring the elevation OF all railroad
tracks in the city and permitting the use
of iron structures for such work was held
invalid by the Supreme Court yesterday.
The court was unanimous in affirming the
decision of Judge Carter of Room g. Ma
rion Superior Court, where the case was
tried two years ago and decided against
the city. The court holds. as shown else
where, that the city has not the power
under its charter, to require elevation.
This decision has been expected since the
ruling of Judge Carter by many of the
interests of the grade crossing question
except the advocates of elevation While
it was believed even by many of those that
the ordinance was invalid IL was expected
that the court would by its decision indi-
cate what kind of an elevation ordinance
would be valid. However, the d scision is
interpreted to mean that the authority OF
the city is not sufficient, as expressed in
the charter, to require any kind of eleva-
ton, that the railroads are on the sur
face of the streets by authority OF law
and that only through additional legisla-
tion can the city acquire authority to re-
quire elevation. This being the case the
grade crossing problem presents two al
ternatives TO the city.
The city may. through the grade crossing
commission that is now i'm session. reach a
ground of agreement between all the par
ties at interest in the solution Of the prob
lem, and by this agreement settle the
problem without additional legislation; or
the settlement so reached, il i'm time may
secure ratification by charter amendment
comforting particular power upon the city.
The other alternative is to secure the
passage of legislation that will confer On
the city the power To require elevation
either by the passage of a general ordi-
nance. or by individual ordinances applying
TO districts or 10 specific railroads. The
bill introduced by Representative Bam-
berger, of this county, Is intended TO grant
this authority but IL meets with hostility
by the city administration because of a pro-
vision reqiring the assessment of one-ffth
of the cost against the district benefited.
ATTITUDE OF ADMINISTRATION.
Mayor Bookwalter is in Chicago and his
opinion to the course the administration
will take is not known. In a recent inter-
view on the Bamberger bill he said he IA
vored the striking out OF the provision i'm
posing cost on the city. The cost he said.
should be charged exclusively to the rail-
roads. except consequential damages 10
abutting property. and these damages. he
not hold the city responsible for Ii is as
sumed that remedial legislation will be
urged.
Chairman Henry w. Bennett. of the
grade-crosSing commission, said last night
that he regarded the commission now I'm
a position TO accomplish more than il could
have done while the outcome Of the case was
uncertain. '"rhe commissions recommends
tions," he said. would be- of course. with
out binding effect on any of the parties
concerned and If accepted By them would
be in the nature Of the acceptance OF arbi-
tration. The decision, II strikes me- clears
the atmosphere for the board and imposes
an additional importance on its work. The
commission Is working without reference TO
legal restrictions or rights. but I'm the desire
to reach practical and adequate and sat
isfactory solution of the problem for all
concerned / assume that the commissions
work will proceed actively along the line
adopted two weeks ago, and that. IL possi-
ble we will reach a conclusion before the
Legislature adjourns, so that IL legislation
is needed there may be time TO obtain it.
Eudorus NJ. Johnson, another member OF
the grade-crossing commission. agrees
with Mr.. Bennett that the commissions
work assumes larger Importance
MR. BAMBERGER's VIEWS.
Representative Bamberger. in discussing
his measure in view of the action of the
court. said:
I'm view of the decision of the Supreme
Court some affirmative legislation Is neces-
sary. TO give the city OF Indianapolis author
ity TO compel elevation of its railroad
tracks. The question which meets at
the threshold is. do we want track eleva-
ton? This is question which indianapolis
should decide for itself In determining
our answer to this question We must con-
slider the interests of the people at large,
OF the merchants and manufacturers and
OF the railroads themselves. IL must be adj
mitted that the public Is insistent upon
some relief from the evils and dangers OF
grade crossings. The retail merchants ap-
pear equally anxious for relief How about
sAf.r. and ms M a r her.
seems 10 be a lack OF unanimity among
them. As to the railroads. while any
scheme OF track elevation must necessarily
place the chief burden OF expense upon
Them they should be willing TO give TO In
dianapolis, TO a degree at least. what other
large cities are getting I'm this direction.
''It will probably be wise for the present
Legislature TO give TO the proper author
ities the right TO compel elevation OF rail-
road tracks. so that the city may be In
position TO enforce such elevation whenever
In is deemed expedient. Anticipating pos
sible adverse decision of the Supreme Court,
a week or more ago introduced bin au-
thorizinz the Board OF Public Works TO
compel elevation OF railroad tracks APP
praising the cost OF construction. damages
and benefits. and dividing the total expense
in the proportion OF 50 per cent. 10 be borne
by the railroads and 20 per cent by the
owners of the property benefted am not
prepared TO say that these proportions are
absolutely equitable. IL Is unquestionably
trtte that the Legislature may compel the
railroads to bear the entire expense OF track
elevation, but II Is likeWlse true that the
railroads. will fight such a measure 10 the
utmost and possibly accomplish its defeat.
THE chief merit OF my bill. as i view IL.
e. that IL affords all interests a common
ground upon which TO stand"
MR. FORTUNE URGES LEGISLATION.
William Fortune. pr sident OF the Com
mercial Clubs elevated track commission.
and "A leading advocate OF elevation ana
the ordinance declared invalid. In dis
cussing the decision said:
.sThe Supreme Court decision Is. oe
course. a great disappointment. ss we have