The San Francisco call., 1908-07-05


criticIsing the action of the board; be ii
further
eResoIved. that the san Francisco
tabor council hereby formally indorses
the action of the board Of supervisors
In preserving TO the city its rights in
the premIseS.'-Resolutio adopted by
the labor council on Sutter street fran
chise controversy.
The san Francisco labor council,
after thorough investigation into the
subject. has by unanimous vote upheld
The action Of the board of supervisors
in refusing q trolley permit in lower
Market street 10 the Sutter street rail-
way company. The council placed the
matter in the hands Of its executive
committee which made an extensive
report at the meeting Friday night.
After q discussion of all the points in
volved the council adopted the report,
which contained the resolutions quoted
above.
WOULD MONOPoLIZE STREET
The executive committee Of the coun-
ell. as q result of its investigation,
reached the conclusion that the pur-
pose Of the United Railroads, which
controls the Sutter street company, was
TO monopolize lower Market street IN
manner that would shut out the Geary
line. The report reviews the history
Of the Market street franchises from
1879 10 the present time, showing that
in the original grants provision was
made for Two lines in Market street
and no more one now is held by the
United Railroads, and by the use OF the
SHtter company, dummy corporation,
il proposes 10 gain second Overhead
Il, f.1u al 0rar07
petitorS.
The fun report on the subject fol-
lows:
Your executive committee hereby di-
rects the attention Of the council 70
the criticism emanating from certain
quarters concerning the action OF the
board OF supervisors IN refusing 70
allow the United Railroads OF san
Francisco to string electric wires anQ
run trolley cars on the outer railway
tracks on Market street from Sansome
street 10 the city's water front.
In order that the delegates may be
fully informed as to all the facts IN
connection with the refusal OF the
board of supervisors 10 grant the de-
sired privilege without securing GER
tain cOmpensating advantages 10 the
city, your committee submits the fol-
lowing brief history of the case:
On September 20, 1879, an order was
approved granting TO the Market street
railway company a 80 year Iranchlse
on certain streets, including Market
street from the city water front TO
Seventeenth street, and one of the con-
diuOns OF this grant to the company
was that the board Of supervisors re-
served the right TO grant franchise
TO one other company 20 use Market
street for distance Of five blocks.
On November a, 1879, an order was
approved granting 10 the Sutter street
railroad company 90 year franchise
on certain streets, and this franchise
included permission 10 use Market
street from the city front TO Sansome
street, the board Of supervisors thus
making use Of the reservation con-
tained in the grant TO the Market
street railway company.
RAILWAY Is MERGED
In 1902. % years after the granting
Of the franchise above mentioned, the
Sutter street railway company was
merged into the United Railroads,
which hao previously become the sue
cessOT in interest TO the Market street
railway: but the Sutter street company,
while in fact part Of the United
Railroads, retained its original cor
pOrate existence with a view to retain
ing Independent possession Of the
franchise for the outer tracks on Mar
ket street thus preventing the use
Of lower Market street by rival COM
pany. Up to the time of the fire in
April. 1906, the SUtter street company
continued TO run horse cars on Mar
ket street to the city front from San
some street.
When the United Railroads petitioned
the old board Of supervisors in May,
1906, for permit TO electric its
various cable roads the outer tracks
OF the Sutter street company on lower
Market street, not being cable tracks,
We're not included in the request, pre-
sumably through an oversight and
when permission TO electric was
granted these tracks were not in
cluded
quick to realize its omission, the
Sutter street railroad company filed a
petition on June 4. 1906, for permit to
use an overhead trolley on said tracks.
A permit for permanent trolley line
was denied, but temporary permit
was granted later
Apparently not deferred by the re-
fusal Of the board to grant a perma-
nent franchise TO use the trolley on
these outer tracks without securing
compensating advantages for the city.
namely, the right to use said tracks by
the Geary street line, the United Rail
roads proceeded TO electric the outer
tracks with every provision for per-
manency.
UNITED RAILROADS TACTICS
At different periods till June l, 1908
temporary permits were granted to the
company, and during the life Of these
temporary permits efforts were made
10 reach satisfactory agreement with
the company whereby an order might
be issued to grant the use of the tracks
10 the Geary street line. All efforts In
this direction were met with absolute
refusal by the company.
On June l, 1908, it being apparent
shat no agreement could be had with
the company, the board of supervisors
passed resolution denying further
permits to run trolley cars on the
tracks in question unles satisfactory
compensation was given the city in re.
turn.
In view Of the above facts. your com.
mittee believes that the board of super.
visors has not only performed its full
duty in the matter Of protecting the
city's interests in refusing to grant
permanent trolley franchise on the out.
er tracks of the Sutter street railroad
company. in Market street, from tn,
city water front TO Sansome street bu,
its attitude in demanding that the cit,
receive in return for the franchise ade-
quate compensating advantages should
receive the support Of all citizens
therefore be il
Resolved, that we deplore the attitud,
Of those individuals and association:
that are. either through ignorance o.
the exact facts or from questionabl,
motives, at the present time criticisint
the action of the board: be il furthei
Resolved, that the San Francisco la
Dor council hereby formally indorse,