The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1906-04-04
MIXED RESULT
WAS OBTAINED
Chicago Citizens Voted Against OPP
Grafton Of the Street Rail
ways by the City.
PRINCIPLE WAS ALL RIGHT
BUT 1T CANNOT BE PUT INTO
PRACTICE.

%&%%+&A%%&%&A%+@%A%AAAA%*&
me total vote east on the queS- =
= ton of municipal ownership was =
? PHIL Of this number 12O.911 y
2 were cast in favor of municipal
Z operation of the street railways. y
, and 110,260 against it. In order y
= TO become binding the proposition =
= to operate the railways should =
have received 13S.7O3 votes. It y
= therefore fell short of the required y
: number by 1872 votes
The proposition to issue $75.000.-%
= GOO In street railway certificates y
> was carried by a vote of 1f0.00S y
Z against 106669. The question of =
= public policy was carried by a y
%%%%&@%$%\@&%%&%AAAAAAAAAA
Chicago. April 3-Under the result
of the city election held today. in
which the question of municipal own
ership Of the street railways was the
vital issue. the city Of Chicago can pro-
coed TO acquire and control the rail-
ways, but cannot operate them. At
the same time the voters. while decIar-
ing that the city shall not proceed to
operate the railroads. declared that as
a question of policy it would be desir-
able for the city to do so.
The Propositions.
Three propositions were submitted to
the voters, the first OF which was:
Shall the city Of Chicago proceed to
operate street railways
This proposition required 90 Der cent
Of the total vote cast in order to be
come effective. The total vote was 231.-
11. Of this number the proposition to
proceed to the immediate operation of
the street railways secured but O911
votes. 1872 short Of the necessary
thTee-fifths.
The second proposition involved the
approval Of an ordinance previously
passed by the city council providing
for the issue OF street railway certifi-
Gates in amounts not TO exceed SIS
100000 for the purchase. ownership and
maintenance Of the street railways.
This was carried by about $500 votes
The third question, which was sim
ply on the question Of public policy
and has no legal effect whatever. is
Shall the city council proceed with
out delay to secure the municipal
ownership and operation of the street
railways under the Mueller law. in
stead of granting franchises to private
companies 80
This proposition was carried by
about $500 votes.
Mayor Dunno Disappointed.
Mayor Dunno construed the passage
of the $75.00O,OO0 certificates and public
policy proposition as victory for mu-
nicipal ownership, but expressed his
disappointment over the defeat of the
proposition for municipal operation he
said: 4 admit that I am disappointed
because the victory is not complete.
The important proposition. however. at
the present time. IS Cor the issuance of
the certificates and this has been car
ried. I regret. however. very much
that we did not get the necessary ma
jOrity to enable us legally to operate
the street railway lines. But this will
not prevent us from again going be
fore the people after we have the street
railway lines and asking for the neces-
sary authority TO operate The people
viii vote for operation with a big ma
jOrity at the prop n time"
Bitterly Fought.
The election was one of the most
interesting TO Chicago voters that has
been held in many years The vote
was much larger than had been eX-
pected, and all day the contest for and
against municipal ownership was bit
terly fought. Party lines were largely
ignored, and the eligibility of candi-
dates depended more upon their atti-
tude toward municipal operation of
street cars and high license for sa-
looms than upon their party records.
OF the tnirty-hve aldermen who were
elected today Mayor Dunno claims that
municipal ownership and that he Will
have much less difficulty in passing
measures relating to that doctrine
through the city council than has been
his fortune heretofore. The faction op-
posed to municipal ownership declares
that they still hold the control of the
council and that Mayor Dunno will
have no greater success in the future
than he has had in the past.
Saloon Question.
Besides the question of municipal
ownership the issue was made in many
of the aIdermanic contests on whether
the saloon license of the city shall be
$500 or $1,000. The low figure was in
existence up to March ,. when the city
council by close vote and after a
hard fight passed an ordinance raising
the amount to $1,000 The number of
crimes which have lately been COM
mitted i'm this city against women
has caused many people TO believe that
the crimes are attributable to the large
number of saloons. and they favored
the increase in license as a means of
decreasing the number. The LIQUOR
interests made a strong fight against
every alderman who was up for re-
election who had voted for the license
of 81 600 OF the fifteen men against
whom they put their influence, twelve
We're elected and three defeated. OF
the nine aldermen up for reelection
who voted for the continuance of the
$500 license. all were returned to their
seats in the council. There is little
danger. however. that the high license
will be repealed.
The votes in several OF the wards
were so close that 1t probably viii
require the official canvass to deter
mine the result, but the probabilities
are that the Republicans win have a
majority of three or four votes.
The old council consisted of thirty
seven Republicans. thirty-two Demo-
Gratis and one independent.