The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-12-10
YESTERDAYS VOTE.

Public opinion, as shown by the
above vote, abundantly sustaihs the
proposition that the gates on street
cars should be discarded as occasioning
delay, Inconvenience and annoyance.
The ballots have come in mainly I'M
solicited, from people who have been
sufficiently interested to mail or bring
them. In many instances the votes,
have been accompanied by communica-
tions explaining why they were cast.
Upon the request Of the street car
management that the patrons of street
cars be more expeditions in getting off
and on cars to save the delays, T
Journal suggested that the gates had
educated the passengers, to the habit of
waiting in their seats until the car
stops; that they prevented people from
alighting from cars before they came to
complete stop, as is the rule in other
cities; furthermore that they made peo-
pie miss cars at Junction points.
The street car management, although
admitting that there was waste of
time, disputed T n 9 Journ on these
points. It was claimed that the gates
did not cause delay and that they pre-
vented accidents.
The Journal, following the sug-
gestion of a correspondent, Mr.. j. J.
Ankeny, undertook to ascertain public
sentiment. A vote was invited which
was against the retention of the gates,
but it was thought possible that the
test was not fair one, as the people
voted with little consideration, and
some seemed to be influenced by the
! way others voted.
TIL g j ourn a then offered to print
communications expressing the views Of
streetcar patrons. It has undertaken
to fulfil its contract, but it did not
anticipate such response. Evidently
the public is deeply interested In the
question. In this issue it has been
found necessary to give but brief ex-
tracts of letters which in their entirety
would fill several pages.
With the exception Of one editorial
utterance, made on Friday, in the way
of comment upon the letter Of CORE
spondent who, by figures taken from
officials sources that gave comparisons
with six other cities, showing that the
/ gates do not afford the protection from
accidents that is claimed for them, T h e
Journ has not undertaken to infu-
ence the expression Of opinion It has
printed opinions that were extrava-
gantly flattering to the street railway
company with just as much readiness as
it has those Of adverse criticism. It
has endeavored to get from the street
railway management something more
tangible in support of it's policy Of shut
ting people in behind gates than the
mere assertion that the gates are not at
fault for a delay in streetcar service,
which it admits is serious.
Briefly, The Journal has left 1t
to the people, to those who rideson the
. streetcars every day and have the
opportunities Of actual experience and
observation, as to whether the gates
constitute nuisance and a delay, and
the people stand four to one in express
ing disapproval of the gates. In the
majority of cases, too, those wishing
the gates retained are Influenced by the
belief that the gates prevent accidents
to considerable degree, an assumption
that is not borne out according to the
best obtainable authority.
AS to whether the gates will be taken
off, there has never been much reason
probably, to hope that that would be
done now. But the expression of public
sentiment, so spontaneous and general
as to the use of the gates and the way
they are operated, ought at least to leaG
: to some Improvement In the handling Of
= the gates and more consideration fo1
the convenience Of the public, especially
, at junction points.