The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1912-04-16
council Last Evening by a
Vote of Seven to Five Rati-
fies Agreement Signed by
the Board.
ARGUMENTS PRO AND
CON ARE PRESENTED
Quite a Delegation of Affect
ed Property Owners Op-
pose Action Taken-Legal
Fight Probable.

Council, last night, by vote of sew
zen to five voted to take the car tracks
lout of the Glen and place then on
Twentieth street. The meeting was at
tended by about four hundred inter
Tested spectators, some of whom made
lspeeches for and against council adopt
ling the agreement signed by the two
traction companies and the board of
Ipublic works, which provides that the
tracks be removed from the Glen and
tplaced on Twentieth street. When the
announcement was made that the
fGlen track controversy was up for
reconsideration, Mr.. Kehlenbrink,
Iproperty owner, spoke for few mo-
lments, ending by threatening, "if we
tcan't get justice here we will take the
smatter higher. / give you fair warn
ting" He objected to the tracks on
Twentieth street, saying the tracks
there would render the approach to
that street dangerous. He called at
ftention to the thirtythree taxpayers
gwho had signed the remonstrance
fagainst placing of the tracks in Twen-
ltieth street
| 8saWest Side Heard From.
George Shofer, west side grocer,
then arose and said the people west of
sthe river were as good as those in the
east end, and asked that the desire of
Fthe residents of the west side, of
whom, he stated, about seventy-five
spercent were in favor of removing the
| tracks from the Glen, be considered.
Clayton Hunt then made speech,
,outlining the street car controversy in
tregards to the tracks in the Glen He
stated he had been one who had help
ked place the tracks in the Glen but
THAT he had since seen his mistake,
kand wanted the city council to remove
1.-THE Objectionable line.
The charge was also made that the
!street car company had placed it's
tracks in the park illegally, and had
sTecognized the fact by stipulating in
1.-THE contract, that in case 1t was fore
ssedfrom the Glen it might use the east
,side of North Twenty-second street
.for its freight car line.
1t was stated by both the city attor-
Sney, A. M. Gardner, and the assistant
,city attorney, Wilfred Jessup, that the
tracks in the Glen were placed there
Illegally, and that only the city coun-
! Gil had the authority to remove the
tracks.
Jessup Favors Action.
/ Attorney Jessup, who had part in
.the legal squabble which arose when
fthe tracks were first put into the Glen,
spoke at great length on the traction
lquestion from start to finish. He said
,that Judge Macy of Winchester, to
Whose court the injunction case was
,svenued from this county, in his decis-
lion, overruling the petition for injunc-
tion against the interurban company,
Isaid the tracks were placed in the
ipark illegally but that no legal steps
could be taken against the company
except by the city council.
Finally the vote was taken. Those
who voted for removing the T. H. &
lE. tracks from the Glen were: Coun-
'cilmen Engelbert, Thatcher, Won Pein.
iWaidele. Weishaupt, VESSEL and Will
lliams. Those who voted against ratify-
ing the agreement for removal of the
tracks were Councilmen Bartel, Burd-
j sail, Evans, Kaufman and King.
On the reading of the second ordi-
nance, which gave the Ohio Electric
company the same rights to North
Twentieth street as were given the 7.
H, |. and E., the vote was s to for
Gratifying the agreement. Councilman
king said he was in favor of taking
the tracks from the Glen, but that his
lconstituents were against it and he
had voted that way. but inasmuch as
his first vote had been lost for his
constituents, he would vote for the
agreement on the second ordinance.