The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-12-16
CITY NEWS
MAKES STATEMENT
. ON TROLLEY GATES
g. q. GOODRICH EXPLAINS THE
CoMPANY's POSITION.
He Argues by Implication that the
Company Is Legally Bound to Main
tain the Gates as an Arrangement
Necessary to the Safety Of the Pas
sengers,'s

sengers.''
c. Ct. Goodrich, vice president of the
Twin City Rapid Transit company, pub
fishes in the Tribune this morning in
the form Of an advertisement state
ment to the patrons of the street rail-
way company about the use of the gates
on the streetcars. Inasmuch as Mr..
Goodrich 8 statement reaches thru the
that Of he journal where the
public has been discussing this question
OF gates, II h Q Ourn a. takes pleas
gre in sepublishing the statement re-
It was quite unnecessary for Mr..
Goodrich to appeal to another paper to
present his view Of the matter. The
jour- Ia was introduced by a state
ment from an officer Of the company
who declined, however, to permit the
use of his name. The ournal's
desire was and is to be absolutely fair
in the consideration of this detail of
our principal public service company,
and invited statement at the outset
did not have as complete a statement as
that now furnished by Mr.. Goodrich
and given by authority was no fault of
h r a rs effort in that direc-
ton. sr.- ......
AS to the disparity between the fig
ures published by T b e Journals and
those cited by Mr.. Goodrich, it only de-
sired to cite the fact that those quoted
in this paper were from government
sources.
The discussion of the gate question
participated in SO. largely by the public
and developing 50 much general inter.
est, may not lead to the discarding of
the gates, but certainly it ought to be
suggestive to the company of the i'm
portance Of the utmost care in hand
ling them so as to minister in the high
OF the passengers. Such result would
certainly Justify the recent expression
of public sentiment on the. question,
The Official Statement.
The statement of Mr.. Goodrich Is as
follows:
"To the Patrons Of the Street Railway
Company:
"We have seen of late some criticism
on the use of gates on the cars Of the
street railway company. In this con-
nectlon statements have been made to
the effect
First-That the gates were put on
the cars solely for our own benefit.
Second-Contrary to the wishes of
our patrons.
Third-In spirit of reckless defiance
of public sentiment and
Fourth-That our duty to the public
did not require us to do so.
'The first statement is true in part.
EThe second statement could not be
true as our patrons did not have and
therefore could not express any pref
| erences about gates until after they had
been installed.
"The third statement is absolutely
false. Our respect for public senti-
ment when it is right is supreme. When
it is wrong or based upon erroneous as
sumption, we frankly admit we are
| however, our respect for it is entirely
too healthy to meet it in spirit Of
reckless defiance
"That the fourth statement is also
| untrue will appear from the following
| quotation from supreme court decision
| rendered in one of our cases.
,""Street railway companies, as car
to exercise the highest degree of care
and diligence consistent with the nature
Of their undertaking, and are RESPONSE
BILE for the slightest neglect. This rule
extends to the management of the cars
and track, and to all the arrangements
necessary for the safety of passengers
| as respects accidents from collision or
| otherwise
eff gates on street railway cars is an
| arrangement which will minimize acct
| dents and not inconsistent with street
street railway business, then it not only
was our duty to the public to equip our
cars with gates, but the above ruling of
the supreme court was tantamount to a
mandatory order instructing our COM
pany to do 50.
I It will not be contended that gates
to prevent passengers from getting on
/ and off moving. cars are inconsistent
| with the work of carrying passengers.
| AS to whether gates minimize acct
dents the following figures speak for
| themselves.
''In the year 1894 the year before
gates were installed we had 1855
caused by people getting on and off cars.
SIN 1904 ten years later notwith-
standing the fact that we handled more
than twice as many passengers, acct
dents d1G tS on and G our
both cities. p@
"1f the 1894 percentage Of accidents
to passengers handled had prevailed in
1904 our accidents due to getting on and
off cars would have been over $500 in
stead Of 259.
eff human life and suffering are en-
! titled to any consideration, then tour
duty to the public would seem to be
| apparent. can and do understand
fully that at times the gates may prove
an annoyance, but taking all the condi-
tions into consideration I do not be-
| lieve or at least I do not wish to be-
lieve that anyone familiar with all the
facts in the case would wish them dis
carded.
! emo consideration Of the case will be
complete which does not take into con-
sideration the fact that fully IS per
cent Of our passengers are either wom-
| en-, children or elderly persons.
| &C. G. Goodrich, Vice President.'