Los Angeles herald., 1905-07-10
MAYOR BELIEVES
CASE WILL FAIL
SAYS 21-YEAR FRANCHISES
ARE VALID
TALKS OF PROPOSED SUIT
Chief Executive Gives His Views Re-
gardIng Brief Filed by Judge
John S. Chapman With
City Clerk
TALKS OF PROPOSED SUIT

The general attack upon the charter
of the city, its laws and methods Ct
doing business by the railway interests,
as explained in The Herald yesterday
morning, was discussed earnestly by
city officials and business men yes.
terday
Mayor McAleer maintains that the
21-year franchise is legal and refuses
to believe the case of Judge Chapman
will be successful. He says
II believe the 21-year franchise law
to be one of the best ever passed in the
state of California.
Further than this 1 believe it will
stand the test of the courts. believe
that Judge Chapman is the representa-
tive Of Huntington in the case.
Thinks Charter Will Stand
Il know what the contentious of our
opponents are and 1 believe we can win,
for l think the charter will stand.
When the ordinance granting the
franchise for thirty-two years came ZIP
to me I was allowed by law ten days
for consideration before deciding upon
my course regarding it.
For years I had opposed the 32-year
law and favored the 21-year franchise
amendment, and of course could not
stamp the ordinance with my approval
and l did not. During the ten days in
which 1 held the ordinance the legisla-
ture ratified the new amendments to
the charter which limited street rail-
way franchises to twenty~one years.
by the adoption of the law 1 was
enabled to send the ordinance back to
the council without my approval, and
with my opinion backed by the law. 1T
was then too late for anybody, no mat
ter what his belief, to grant franchises
for more than twenty-one years, and
the council upheld me in my decision.
Anybody can see the disadvantage tr
the city which would result should
Huntington win in this suit 1t would
bring about condition of affairs great
ly detrimental to the city's good In
fact franchises would be worth nothing
to anybody but Huntington. 1t costs
the city from $3.50 to 5000 to advertise
and sell franchise, and If the railroad
magnate should win his suit the condl-
tion resulting would be such that he
could come in and bid 5000 or so for a
franchise and get it,"
The city attorneys were of the opinion
yesterday that the city would be able
to win out in the pending suit, without
regard to how high the railroad at
torneys chose to carry the case. The
points to be made by the city will be
that in the granting of a franchise the
mayor is an essential part of the legis-
lative machine and therefore no fran
chise can be granted without his ap-
proval, unless the same be adopted by
two-thirds vote of all the members
of the council over his Veto
Other city officials when approached
yesterday did not share this opinion
and appeared to believe that Hunting
ton had a preponderance of law on his
side. Many of the officials also disagree
with the mayor regarding his views on
the franchise question.
Ever since the inception of the 21-
year franchise law there has been a
serious division among city officials
in regard to 1t. Consequently at the
present time there is large number OF
city officials who take the opposite side
from the mayor.
An official taking the other view said
last night: This 21-year law is, and
always was, in my opinion, foolish. We
need more street car lines. Huntington
says he will build none under the 81
year rule. The reason for this attitude
is simple when one considers all of the
propositions which arise"