Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1909-09-17
cally prohibitive cost.

cally prohibitive cost.
The tnterurban railway system has
come to stay and the growth of Mar
shalltown. as of other cities, will be
very largely dependent on securing
such systems; and the more and the
earlier we secure them, the greater will
be the benefit to us. To benefit us they
must go thru our city, not by DIT, in or
der that they may land their passen-
gers at the doors of our business
houses. Other towns and cities are
bidding for these systems and in order
to secure them we must offer as many
attractions and as few obstacles as
possible. 1t therefore seems to me to
be OF vital Importance that the city
should reserve ITO itself the right over
its streets for that purpose; and in no
way by amy twist of language leave it
possible for the street railway COM
pany (whoever may secure the fran
chlse) to claim exclusive rights. The
desired result may be secured by ex-
pressly reserving to the city the right
to grant to interurbans the right in
common over our streets or by provid-
ing that the city shall at all times
nave the right to fix the terms and
conditions on which interurbans may
pass thru our city and over the tracks
of our street railway. L suggest the
idea; the details can be worked out
by those having charge of the city's
interests.
In this way the Mcbride people or
any others who want and are able to
build interurbans can build their roads
to and secure entrance thru MARSHALL
town, our city thus becoming the hub
OF an interurban system.
1t is possible under the present
Jones' Hovey exclusive franchise that
this could not be done but they or their
prospective successors are now most
anxious to Secure extensions of their
franchises and must take what they
can get or go without the extensions.
have myself believed that our Iowa
supreme court, following their wonder
full sonersault in announcing their
theory OF strict construction of exclu-
sive franchise grants in the Des Moines
horse railroad case years ago, might
some day hold, if found necessary to
protect the peoples rights, that a street
railways exclusive franchise covers
only the streets over which it operates
its road, in other words party having
an exclusive franchise. whether rail-
way, gas or electric lights, can not act
the dog in the manager but must either
give service or lose their franchise
grants. But that question need not
be settled in the courts so far as we
are concerned. We can secure all those
rights by proper negotiation and care
in granting the new franchise. / also
notice that nothing is specified in the
proposed contract as to how early in
the morning and late ait night the cars
shah run.
Another thing The bond as under
that the people signing shall pay all
costs and expenses in court by the city
in litigation witch other parties grow
ing out of the proposed franchises. 1t
ought also to provide, it seems to me,
that if the signers of the said bond do
not on demand OF the city pay such
costs and expenses, and suit is brought
on such bond, that those signing such
bond shall also pay all costs and at
torneys fees incurred by the city in
such suit. Generally in suits on such
bonds the defendants make such long
drawn out contests that cities from
very WEAKNESS of delay and expense
compromise for a small part of what
they are justly entitled to receive. I'm
der this condition to pay costs and at
ttorney fees in case suit is brought on
the bond the longer the defendants lit
igate the more they will have to pay in
the end Let US have quid pro quo,
a Roland for our oliver, for every right
we grant away. r. E. SEARS.