The Detroit times., 1912-06-06
Editorial Page Of The Detroit Times
SOME THINGS FOR THE MA YOR TO
EXPLAIN IN NEXT STA TEMENI
Hon. william B. Thompson,
City Hall, Detroit.


Our Mayor:
We presume you pretty that monthly
which you have been inviting to kick ourselves for
having another franchise for the u R. and we nay be
udng but what do having heard the
testimony Cleveland in the reent fare case
By way Mayor playwright of either farce tragedy has
ever conceived involved situation for masterpiece
than which these heecen fare proceedings in the United States
court place you and your administration.
municipal ownership the first thing heard from
Won railway after had taken office
at the end with the D. u R. heads which
yourself l2ear franchise for the private
of the line
This franchise provided for three-cent time
provided for fvecen fares at all times ddn happen to
have quarter to spare.
put upon the city the burden doing RS paving and
profit of 10 cent in the company did the
itself
corporation time and his staff out in force
stump using power trying CONVINCE THE
PEOPLE THAT THIS WAS FAIR PROPOSITION
present corporation counsel in the United States court
now trying to THE COURT WASN'T FAIR PRoPo
HTIoN
In support of which he behalf of the city
railway commissioner Cleveland who has testified that the
being fare basis with the
pny doing the paving, and making cent dividends
By way Mayor nasmuch happened you while
you that when look
ing expert you
selected du Pnt of that city preference to Commissioner Witt!
everybody far knowing what he is talking
reasonable rate of fare and reasonable
dividends railway properties private hands
Among other things he know where put the emphasis and
could have advised you better than Mr. du Pont
For instance the emphasis argument with the com
pany upon 12year franchise
He could have told he told the council converting AID
John Lodge you should have MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP
that the council would have KID the bill for
such service, too
like this, Mr. Mayor.
The aldermen all friends of yours.
isn't better fellow in town as far that goes
they simply refused to let of $4,000 to expert who would
get you S bad as du Pont did
That's too much for digging one political grave
Tell the next statement please why was du Font instead
Witt
the following view expressed
before the aldermen:
Personally believe there only
ton system must be owned BY the city That the On benu
temporary Notwithstanding the fact that n csve
ss sFsss I% ns. s. eos e IL. e. p ppsr
because Witt is realthing municipal ownership man
Well perhaps Mr. Mayor had better slide
due days and appear to have
fob on your hands you going have
They questions the people asking
also wondering how it happens that the city
fighting lawsuit for treecen fares when quicker road them
hand in charter city and operate the lines
thing you have seemed disposed to help along
all that who started the suit now being
looked and advisers necessary step
TO HEAD OFF MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP
Just a word more Mr. Mayor
beginning your monthly statements by calling the at
people that months since turned
down my franchise or words to that effect
giving your opponents quite opening there
thing you will call attention the fact that
nigh Is months Office and that three quarters OF your
time hand keep the munich
pal ownership promise only world why
were able to defeat Proc Owens.
which you either busy squy and tell them
you only kidding them to get their votes
need of crosown lines and extensions How
thoses