Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1905-07-18

franchise ordinance submitted, II was
stated by one of the members who re-.
fuftd TO slgn It that there vas no rca-
son for rushing the franchise through
nt he Dor ONE had NO, given n tho con.
Fldorollon II deserved, and wanted
more time
AMENDMENTS MADE,
~ the con mitlcc meeting several
amendments we're made 10 the fran.
chlso, which bitter protected tho cily's
interests, on amendment gave the
cry nudltor authority 10 inspect the
bookN of The company 10 as 10 keep
check on the commission due the city,
FornHtrom objected to giving q bO.ycar
franchise, hut The majority of the com.
nltlcc outvolod him ON that point
VOLS wanted the parties to incorporate
their company before the franchise was
granted 80 tina, the council would
know with whom II was dealing llo
thought That If the Incorporation should
be perfected then there would be- no
DANGER Of The franchise being haWkcd
about by persons ~ whom n was
granted He also oontcndod that tho
company should incorporate under the
laws of this state,
INCORPORATION AFTERWARDS.
Mr. parst IN answer ia tho euggcs.
lion " Mr. VOLS, said that ne would
post guarantee ~ $4,000 that the com.
punN would be incorporated within 50
days after the franchise NJ granted
" the Incorporation is not perfected
IN that time then the money shall 70
to san Lake cry 4 check Tor that
amount drawn on Mccormick n co.'s
buuk WaH ron' 90 the council last
night together with the terms Of the
forfeiture The committee authorized
lnr city attorney IN draw up the fran.
'hlto ~ amended, but j. was not sub.
mllIod to tho council last night for the
rcupons stated above,
Mr. Frrnsrom I'm opposing tho DO.
ycors provision, cited the case Of tho
ltah Light ~ ly CO.'S franchise and
said tho council was on record against
granting any moro b0.Ycnr franchise,
olhcr members disputed this, ana MI
Wclls remarked that because the colln.
rll hal been unjust IA the Utah Light
n railway Goa II was no rpAsoh they
should be unjust to the present poti-
TONERS, lie rather folt 10 congratulate
them that the council was now showing
"a spirit of fairness.
councilman A. j. Davis uld the Utah
Ilght q Railway CO. had not nccentod
the franchise proposed Mr. Wells an.
sNorod that he had hoard that they had
decided 10 reject H. and Councilman
Davis answered, with u surprising burst
Of lNnknofs, that be dld not know that
he would blame them II they dld, Mr.
Tuddonhnm gave 40 HE opinion that n
the franchise were granted 10 Mcgsrp
Snow a Darst The city ought 10 be
protected against tho tearing up OF the
paved districts ana he suggested that
the new company should obtain private
rights Of way through The blocks IN the
paved districts
SIDEWALKS ORDINANCES
Under suspension NJ the rules the
council passed the following sidewalk
ordinances
EIGHTH WEST STREET,
An ordinance leyying tax and for
the assessment Of property on both
fllCs of Eighth West street from See,
ond South street to Ninth South street.
the west side Of Eighth West street
from ninth South street 10 Tenth South
street, the west side Of Post street
from Flflh South street 10 sixth South
street, the wet side Of Ninth West
street from Fifth South street 10 Sixth
South street the west slide OF Glenn
street from flfth South street south 2Sl
feet, the north side NJ Third South
street from Eighth West street "a
| Ninth West street the south eide Of
Firth South street from Eighth Wost
| tiroot 20 the alley opposite rrawloy
street the south 'ldc Of Eigh,h South
| street from Eghth West street 10 TIT
| usyllle avenue, the south side Of Titus.
vile avenue from Eighth South street
To Indiana avenue, and the south rldo
NJ Indiana avenue from Tilueyillc AYES
| nuo TO Cheyenne street, IN sidewalk dis
uirte Noe a. ~ and w. for the con-
trugtlou ~ cement Sidewalks,
buENo STREET
An ordinance lcyyng tay and lol
| the ASSIGNMENT Of property ON boil
| sldeg of BuGno street from Eloyentt
| EaH iirCrt 30 Twelfth East street u
| sidewalk distic, No &c. tor the con,
| blwcuon NJ "a cement sidewalk
FIRST North STREET
An ordinance lcvying a tax and tor
the assessment OF property on IN,
south vide Of Fhsl North street be
| tween east Temple aud West Tempt
| Rlrcot1, IN Sidewalk district 80, co. foI
the construction ~ q cement sidewalk
ON " STREET
An ordinance repeating and ro.onact
| Ng with amendments an ordinance On
| titled AN ordinance leyying u tax AN,
| for thr dttcHtmcnt OF property on botl
sIdos Of n street from First street I,
smith street ON tho north side o
| taitth str.,t fp,,, IA atp,,t 4, A. .tpa,t