Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1909-08-13

continued Van Law, SIS that the Jones
& Hovey franchise is exclusive. Such
statement is not only ridiculous, but
from a standpoint of the city's con-
tention is perNcious, inasmuch as this
would admit of Jones & Hovey naming
the man who would get this franchise.
If Jones & Hovey are permitted to
name the man. they could also name
the terms the franchise could be ac-
cepted upon. Mr. Van Law said that
he had been informed by reputable
lawyer of the city that Mr.. Hovey
himself had conceded that his company
did not contend that it had an exclu-
sive franchise in Marshalltown."
State Law Prevents.
Mr.. Van Law then went on to show
how positively the exclusive franchise
was contrary to the statute. At the
time the franchise was granted the
Marshalltown Light Power and Rail-
way Company an exclusive franchise
was permissible under the law. but
since then it has become illegal to
grant an exclusive franchise. Van Law
cited section 1919, showing that the
general assembly had reserved the
right to change, alter and modify any
franchise. Van Law also referred to
Judge McClain, of the supreme court,
having set forth f1at-footedly in the
paving case against the local street
railway company, that franchises of
street railway companies are taken
subject 10 modification, and put it I'M
der the reserve power of the general
assembly 10 modify.
Northup Not So Sure.
The mayor asked City Attorney
Northup as TO his opinion of the ex-
elusive feature of the franchise, but
Mr.. Northup did not care to express
~ opinion without first looking it up.
Mr. Gregory raised the question OF a
possibility Of the c<,y getting mixed up
n endless litigation. and Mr.. Nortnup
bought that the city might incidentally
become a party 10 extensive litigation
If another franchise We're granted,
Van Law took issue With the city So
l;citor on this point, and said that the
clty could not possibly be a party, ana
had no legal liability whatever. The
Contention would be between the one
company on one hand. and the other
n the other, the defense being up TO
the party who was accused by the 9TH
r OF invading on his rights.
What ABOUT Recent Franchise?
Gregory raised the point Of The city
.aving granted. within recent years, a
franchise 70 the Marshali-own Electric,
Street, and Interurban Railway Com
pany This had been done. and no
| ueStioa as 10 eXclusiveness had been
| raised by the mayor or any one else
| Why should there be such question
| raised now. The mayor himself, even
| as late as last winter. had been the
advocate of hostile company, and was
no. worried over the exclusive feature
Of any franchise
Incidentally, in this connection. al
tho it did not come up in the meeting,
Frank G. Pierce. secretary of the
Leagu of Iowa Municipalities. who is
very we'll versed on legal points con-
nec,ea with municipalities. said today
70 a member Of the council that Mr.
Norrhup was wrong on his contention
Of the city's liability. and that the city
aad no liability. in his opinion
Aot for Best Interests of City.
MI Van Law. in closing his address.
said 20. there was only one basis on
which here could be claimed any con-
sideration in acting in these franchise
matters. and that was that the city
council act for the best interests Of