The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1910-04-22
HALLY REFUSES To
| PARTICIPATE IN
I ARBITRATION
Writes Judge Murfn That Whole
Proceeding Is in D. U. RS Inter
est. Has No Official Standing and
That He Won't Appear.
Quotes From Hutchins' Court Testi-
mony To Show Bancroft Appraisal
Is Away Too High.

n Judge Murfin, declining the invitation
extended him TO be present in behalf
of the city at the sessions OF the ar
bitration board that will fix the value
of the ID. IT, RS property, and giving
full reasons for taking this position.
Mr.. Hally starts out with a refer
ence to the announcement that the
court OF arbitration will use the Bar.
croft appraisal as basis from which
5 to direct its findings. and will con.
slider the raising OF any valuation in
a the report and any items omitted
from 1t on errors appearing in IT,
An examination of the appraisal as
published. a omuarison of IL with
one made 10 years ago, and discus.
\ sion of 1t with Mr.. Bancroft, satisfy
me that II is decidedly favorable TO
the Detroit United Railway, and this
conclusion is borne out by some re-
cent local history" he continues.
In this connection, Mr.. Hally quotes
from testimony given by President
Jere c. Hutchins in a suit brought by
the Detroit Citizens Street railway
against the city in 1900, to set aside
an assessment. In that testimony Mr.
Hutchins gave the value of the tang
ible property Of the Citizens com
pany, including the Grand River and
the suburban lines, as $1,101,115
Mr.. Hutchins, at that time, gave the
value of the tangible personal prop
erty OF the Fort Wayne & Belle Isle
railway as $117,650.
The total OF the items testified TO by
Mr.. Hutchins was s2,366,765. represent'
ing the total value placed on the street
railway property by the president at
that time. Mr. Hally summarized the
items as follows:
Detroit Citizens Street
Railway, including the
suburban companies and
the Grand River system S1,l0l, ll5 90
Fort Wayne * Belle Isle
Railway Company ..... 1850 90
Detroit Electric Railway. 49S. 600 90
Real estate .............. b5O,OOO w
1T would seem that to add so per
cent to these figures. because OF the
added trackage in the Seventeenth and
sixteenth wards. and for new cars.
would be a generous allowance; We
thus arrive at grand total OF $780,
149," the letter continues.
From the foregoing, which includes
practically all its property, II seems 10
me that II is the duty of the city TO
contend that Mr. Barcroft's appraisal
tives. should not be placed in the po-
sltion of defending report which is
already more favorable To the com
pany than ii should be. There are
other considerations.
"A settlement OF q difficulty be-
tween men is often reduced To the
simple question: Is 1t cheaper TO set.
3 tie or fight? Principle is often sacri.
z feed TO money considerations; but
s. neither the sovereign people nor their
4 representatives have the right TO sac
rifice principle as a matter of saving
time and trouble. The people of this
b city have a proprietary control of the
4 streets, and should not be asked to
b arbitrate for the use of their own
y simply because corporation claims q
right where it has none
Mr.. Hally continues:
The Detroit United Railway has not
asked for franchise. II has not said
that II Will accept the one proposed by
the citizens committee OF hfty II has
~ made no offer. nor has IL rendered
hid for its continuous use OF the public
domain. Why, therefore, arbitrate?
tounding position. An nnofdo,aI 'S COM
mittee OF Atty. with legal counsel u
its own choosing. has devised an ordi.
nance designed to grant a l4-year
blanket franchise to the Detroit Unit
~ ed Railway the rate OF fare TO be fixed
upon basis or guaranteed per cent
return to the company for its OF
the public streets. The whole plan is
already perfected up TO the point OF
Writing into the ordinance the figures
10 be determined by you gentlemen,
and as yet the company has not said
that the plan is acceptable to it.
IL has not even said, at least pub
licly, that 1t will abide BY the hnding
K made by this court of arbitration The
city has had no official part i'm the pro-
a az ltg
whole plan? What OF the public policy
OF enacting it's various sections? What
Z OF the query OF "A munlcipality's right
TO guarantee a hXed and certain in
come to private parties for their use
of public property? What limit does
the charter put upon the city's commits
sion which this proposed ordinance
B brings into existence, are all grave
& questions and only few upon which
compromises itself -parIiclpalInz- IN
"A an unofficial proceeding organized by
those In no manner responsible 10 the
As a legal proposition. neither the
committee OF nifty nor your board has
any authority 10 represent, compromise
and bind the city. And yet what Is at
times made OF these situations b. a
designing corporation. Interviews OF
officials in newspapers. remarks OF men
who afterwards became officials. have
been in recent court proceedings set
upon the city What weight viii be
given to these allegations remains 20
De seen, but II MOutu De al least
wise. IL not dangerous for the city. 10
be present at this arbitration iu view
of litigation begun or contemplated
Even twere there any object 70 be
accomplished or any benefit To be OBJ.
faircd In ny appearing, there are other
aerious reasons why I could not The
Detroit United Railway has at its CONE
mand. locally. men skilled In the mat
ter of any analysis or the various parts
OF its system. II has further. FOR more
than year. with the aid OF outside ex-
perts. been fortifyinEN itself for this
controversy. While the committee Wa.
FittinR and gathering. Information IN
was engaged in the same occupation Il
ms nauC a selection OF such experts q =
n desired and u IA now prepared
The city has not had this opportu-
nifty. IL IL not prepared 10 make a
case or contend against one that -n--
been made. It's appearance az this time
would he Idle and Valueless n is NOT
my purpose 20 enter this or ~ other
" court unless the matter 10 be present
cd has been prepared NJ ! think N
should be- and with experts Of my own
choosing. In this case the preparation
should cover the whole plan and not
4 the single item II valuation
There Is no legal obliRatioN which
a compels the corporation counsel 10
participate In such "A proceeding. bur
this would not deter me II the best In .
terestS 81 my cfieut. the city pointe I'd
IN the direction - my participation
The methods OF the Detroit United
Railway are known TO this community
N Those who have had 20 deal with n
know Its hand and IN this case points
n 20 this Irresistible conclusion The sole
purpose OF this invest gation Is not "a
"A ascertain the truth and the true cash
value OF this property. IL seeks to fos-