The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1912-01-03

: This vote is conclusive evidence to
me that the ID. u. r. is In control OF
the council" declared Aid Charles
McCarty, OF the Thirteenth ward.
Tuesday night. after the council, by
a vote of Is TO 10, had refused to un-
do the work OF Aid Harpfer's Steam
roller" last week and place the
Thompson street car franchise before
the people in such form as not TO de-
ceive voters as to It's real character.
The vote shows continued Aid.
McCarty. who is q staunch municipal
ownership advocate and believer In
fair play, that the ID. u. r. can have
Just about anything II wants from the
council and the people be damned.
! am going to take the stump against
this franchise and I'm going to make
, some plain statements. I'm going to
call q spade spade and let the peo-
pie know just what they are UP
against.
AS a result of the councils action,
the Thompson proposition will go on
the ballot in the unfair form in which
il was drawn by Former Corporation
Counsel Hally, as "sweet-scented,
sugarcoated document, as Aid. Glin-
nan characterized II in his speech In
favor OF reconsideration of last
weeks action.
The debate on Aid. Koenig's mo-
lion to reconsider was one of the
warmest In years and recalled some
of the old.time sessions of the city's
, legislative body. II occupied an hour
and 10 minutes and the outcome was
in doubt almost until the last man
had voted. Then IL was found that
Koenig's attempt had failed by vote
OF Is to 10. The lineup was as fol-
lows.
For reconsideration: Aid. Allan,
Burton, Field, Gilman, Koenig. Knapp,
Iittlefeld. McCarty, Schultz, Theisen,
Thompson, Vernon, Watson, Zoeller,
and the President.-15
Against reconsideration: Aid. BroZo,
Deimel, Ellis, Garvey, Grindley, Harp
fer, Hindle, Heating, Keusch. Lodge.
Lynch, Mason, Merritt, O'Brien, Os-
trowski, owen, Skrzycki. Tossy, and
Walsh.-19
IN opening the argument against re-
consideration and any change In the
ballot, Aid. John Lodge. an anti
municipal ownership man, made some
reference to the "Copperheads' OF
civil war days, and compared the op-
ponents OF the Thompson franchise to
Them. Aid. James Vernon, Of the
Second ward, q civil war veteran, re-
piled vigorously and he made quite
different application OF the Copper
head smile.
copperhead Reference Records.
81 remember the 'Copperheads' OF
he civil war days." he said, for |
was a soldier at the front The De-
troit Free Press was the, representa-
tive OF the 'Copperheads in Detroit,
and many Is the time | have seen II
thrown out OF the camp tents by the
soldiers. II was arguing then, Give
ia peace Call off the hirelings or
Lincoln. Let US give way and end the
war What is IL yelling today? The
same thing exactly, Give the ID. u. X.
this franchise. GIVE EN- these bonuses.
Let us have peace.
THAT isn't my way. ] went through
The Civil war and I'm willing to go
through another here in Detroit. The
question before us tonight is whether
thIs franchise shall go before the peo-
ple with a falce label. AS II has been
ordered submitted il is as false as the
statement It's advocates are using,
that IL means a settlement OF the
street car question. Instead II means
that at the end OF 1924, the ID. U. r.
will still be In possession OF our
streets and we'll have the same fight
over again, for We'll be In exactly the
same position we are In today. I do
not believe In lying down. Let us fight
this battle out"
Aid. owen talked against the recon-
alteration. and he declared that
while he had never voted for Mayor
Thompson, he had been In favor OF
the Thompson franchise from the first
and he thought politics cut no figure
in the question whatever.
Il believe that It's just as good a
proposition as the Codd-Hutchins
franchise and personally shall vote
for It," he said.
Aid. McCarty pointed out the one
sided manner in which the PROPOSE
ton had been framed for submission
20 the electors and proposed as a sub
stitute that this form be used:
"Are you In favor of the street car
franchise as proposed by his honor.
the mayor?"
AID. Ellis referred to the efforts at
reconsideration as Just another
Etumbling block"
The impression seems TO prevail
hsre that the aldermen who are ask
ing for a reconsideration are opposed
20 the submission OF the ordinance on
Jan. a." said Aid. Allan. That Is no'
true. am personally in favor OF its
submission on that date. but would
rke 70 see II submitted in the proper
vay and not havo It go before the
ECenfinusa on Page 6hsss)