The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1905-11-06


paying $50. 900 towards the Inn
prDvement. Furth comes along and
asks for an exclusive franchise.
No other man In the city would
have the assurance TO ask for such
q thing when Moore and Gilman
asked for a franchise on the street
they offered to pay $4,000 as their
share OF the regrade.
CITIZENS EMPRESS INDlGSA-
TON.
Many OF the mos, prominent eitt-
REM who were seen Monday by a
star reporter In an effort TO obtain
their views on the Second avenue
franchise. showed a surprising ig-
norance Of the subject. the com
pzraffve silence OF all other news
papers IN the city having had a ten
deucy 90 keep them uniformed or
mi.InforEned- They accordingly de-
eIinef 70 discuss the matter. Others
who are more or less indirectly con-
necsed with the Seattle Electric In
terests tn business way also re-
fused to talk
Those who had given the matter
any consideration condemned the
franchise In the strongest terms
WOULD PIAACARD THEA.
David Kellnww-'T consider the
Second avenue franchise grab the
biggest outrage against the city
since the Anmnidown crowd. backed
by Furfh. attempted TO secure con-
troll of the Cedar river water sup
ply. and the citizens had TO rise In
their might end call n halt IN the
council chamber. 10 is Infamous
The uze of money II evident. The
people should turn out at the meet
ing Of the council Monday night by
the thousands. and show their So
called representatives that they
cannot be sold out. The photograph
Of every councilman voting for the
iniagItous measure should be plac-
srded. and distributed over the city.
Indignation meetings should be held.
The sentiment exists here TO pre-
vent the steal. and N II could be or
Fanfzed the council would not dare
20 grant the franchise"
~pHOTECT ClTYS RIGHTS"
r Shorrock--'1 can say without
hes4tancy that the city should re-
nerve the right to use the tracks on
Second avenue. This. / understand
IL the provision Of Councilman Muir
phwss proposed amendment am
not In favor Of municipal ownership
Of street railways IN this city SO
early az this. not dcerninE Il prac-
ficabie. but that IL no reason why
the city should not reserve the
right TO use It's own streets II Il de-
sires-
a. 70 whether other private com
panies should also be given the
right 70 use the street am not pre-
pared to say. In general. should
be opposed 70 the granting OF any
exclusive franchise"
WOULD BE CALAMITY.
Vince Faben-''M Most heartily am
IN favor Of the common use CLAUSE
An exclusive franchise on Second
avenue would be a calamity. II
Is difficult. however. 10 get people.
especially newcomers. TO realize that
the botfiiug up Of Second VIII i'm
peril the progress Of the city I'm n
few years. They do not compre-
bend the rapid growth and wonder
fHI changes that have taken place I'm
the landscape OF the city within the
past Is years, and the consequent
Importance OF providing Tor the
future II was only a short time
ago that the Stevens hotel was con-
sidered out OF town. IN 1859 the
Boston block was in the woods.
we know the effect OF granting
steam railway franchises on Rail-
road avenue. which has been used
practically FOR freight yard. Traf-
fie on the waterfront has been
blocked by the trains. the city has
been muiCfed in damage suits arIs-
Ing from negligence on the part 81
the railway companies. and there
has been no remedy.