The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1913-08-13
THE ELECTRIC LIGHT FRANCHISE

An lll-tlmed ana apparently litem-
pered article appeared in last week S
issue Of the Bulletin in relation to
the electric light franchise. Just who
is responsible for the Incorporate
article we do not undertake to state,
but it is evident from perusal of it,
that the editor of the Bulletin thought
it a favorable opportunity to get a
lick at his competitor in business,
who of necessity is very bad man.
1t will not facilitate settlement
of this business proposition to rush
into the newspapers with misrepre-
sensations and charges of want Of
good faith on the part Of either side.
and we are reluctant to believe that
any member of the city council would
so far forget himself as to make this
mistake. There is enough involved
in the matter to engage the best
thought and business ability, as we'll
as patience of all concerned and the
question of vindication of the conduct
of anyone interested can afford to
wait until a settlement is had and the
problem disposed of one way or the
ether
We are sure the business men of
Denison expect the electric light CON-
pany to make every effort and reas-
enable concession to enable it to ar
rive at an understanding with the city
council on the character of a fran
chise to be adopted, if possible, to
take the place of the one soon to en-
pire, and if the company fails to do
this then it has not done it's full duty.
On the other hand the same business
men expect the members of the city
council to make every effort to ar
rive at an understanding with the
electric light company and that in so
doing they will protect the interests
of the city by reasonable provisions
in the franchise, and shall not exact
any unreasonable demands from the
company 1t would not be more
pardonable on the part of the electric
light company to permit some crouch
or prejudice to prevent it's arriving at
conclusion than it would crouch
on the part of some member of the
city council to interfere with his
patiently seeking solution of the
question. The article in question is so
unfair and loaded with so much mis-
representation that we hesitate to dis
cuss it lest we may be tempted to say
something that might be pre1udicial
to the settlement of the questions in.
volved in the adoption of a franchise.
The suggestion that Mr.. Conner was
instrumental in having meeting
called and that he was the sole repre-
sentative of the electric light COM
pany at the meeting is in keeping
with number of other false asser-
tons in the article. 1t is sufficient to
say that Mr.. Conner neither called
| SuC 1ucCIAllS 1Ol Ulu uC AOLIiy luC
members of the council that meeting
was desired, nor was he the only men,
Der of the company present at the
meeting. He did not speak to a
single member of the council about
meeting except as he was told that If
he saw a certain member of the coun-
Gil to tell him to 60 to the hall, that
a meeting had been called. The truth
is there was no meeting of the coun-
Gil at all and all that was done, as we
understand, was that the members of
the council convened informally to
meet Mr.. Fisher, an electrician who
had come to the city that day and
who wished to meet the members of
the council and if there was no meet
ing of the council then the sensation
al motion to adjourn, mentioned in
the Bulletin article, was never made.
The truth is different ones of those
assembled left the room at different
times.
The article states that the coun-
Gil reminded Mr.. Conner that the
franchise had been considered at
many meetings Of the council
during the spring and that the
provisions were finally agreed up
on by the council with the under
standing that they were acceptable
to the company. This is another sam
pie of the misrepresentation in the
article. 1t is not true in any sense
that the franchise which is now
offered by the council was ever con-
sidered at meeting of the council
last spring. 1t never saw daylight un-
til the last of May when 1T was
brought here from Kansas City by