The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1905-05-16

Upon the sole authority of Council
ii man +. :. Ferustrom, who at
tached his signature to it, the
ordinance extending tn various fran
chises of the Utah Light x Railway
company until Jan /. 1850. was intro
duced at last nights meeting of the
city council Contrary to Councilman
Ferustrom' intention. it was referred
to City Attorney 9. @. Dey to pass
upon its legal phases
The T ference was effected after
spirited debate by a vote OF ayes 10
6 noes. i'm which the thirteen members
of the council present lined up as FOL
lows: Ayes. Black. Dean, HartenSt-In-
HOLIDAY. Martin, Neuhausen- Wood
noes Barnes. FernstTom. Preece- Iud-
denham. Wells. Hewlett Couucilmen
A J. Davis and Z II. Davis were alb
sent.
At the suggestion Of Councilman
Barnes. City Attorney Dey was in
structed to report his conclusions at
the next meeting Of the council, 10 be
held Monday night
When the ordinance was taken up for
first reading Councilman Holiday
asked If IL was not Il new dOCUm ntr
and wanted to know how IL came be-
fore the council. saying that he knew
of no such ordinance having been IN
| trOdUCed.
Councilman FernstrOm was quoted
by the clerk as having signed the
ordinancs. whereupou councilman
Ferustrom admitted that he had at
tached his name to It,. He said 1t was
not his intention to urge action on IT
at that meeting. but that he would
simply ask that IT be read and laid
over until the next meeting u was
A new ordinanCs. he said. and by lay
inC it over the members would have
a chance to famiIiaTize themselves with
its provisions.
Councilman HOLIDAY wanted to have
IL referred to the city attorney, but
Councilman Black suggested that IT be
read first.
There being no opposition to the
reading the ordinance was read
Fight Over Reference.
At the conclusion Of the reading of
the ordinance. Councilman Black
moved that it be referr to the city
attorney with instruction to report
wherein il differs from the franchises
under which the Utah Light & Rail-
way company is now operating and in
what respect 10 releases thu Utah Light
& Railway company from any of the
obligations imposed on il by ito pres
eut franchises
Councilman Ferustrom jumped TO
his feet with an objection to the mo-
ton. He asserted that it WAS out Of
! order because the ordinance was not
1 before the council He said IL was still
! in the hands Of the committee and
could not come before tn council until
reported by the committee. 1t coUldn
/ be considered as a franchise because
/ i'm order to make a franchise of IT a fee
( of $500 would haVa to accompany IL.
/ \ long discussion euSUed. Council
( man Wells sustaining the position OF
I Councilman FeruStTOm. Councilman
/ HOLIDAY insisting on reference TO the
/ city attorney. Councilman Martin CO.
( inciding with the claim of Councilman
/ FPTnStTOm as to the necessity of the
company putting up 5000, and Council
man Black explaining that the S20l
/ it I'm WAS one of the propositions that
/ he wanted tho city attorney to clUci-
/ date He wanted to know whether the
/ council must insist on getting the
/ money or whether it could be passed
| up
| The who'll tenor Of the arguments o.
Councilmen FeTnstrOm and Wells wa}
that as Councilman FernstrOm hat
! said the ordinance was not before TIT
council action could not be taken on +
/ at that meeting. and it was sought Z
| have Councilman Blacks motion de
clared out of order
.Hartenstein Rules for Reference.
Councilman Hartenst=in. who was il
the chair, President Hewlett havini
| previously gone on the floor to TAX
| part in debate on another matter, he'll