South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1915-07-27
Council Informed by City At
tOrney That Jitney Bus
Service Co. Drafted
Ordinance.
ST0CKH0L0ER DENIES
MONOPOLY IS INTENT
Majority of City Fathers Are
Against Proposed LaW-IS
Copied After lansing,
Mich, Bill.

Members OF the city council at a
special meeting Monday night were
informed by City Atty. Seebirt that
the jitney bus ordinance which was
anonymously mailed TO councilmen
last week, was the work of directors
of the Jitney Bus Service CO. Wheth-
er the Jitney Bus Service CO. hopes to
create monopoly for themselves by
such law, the city attorney did not
state.
This statement was confirmed Tues
day morning by a. ID. Hubbard, father
of Lyle Hubbard, head of the jitncy
bus concern, and himself a stockholder
in the business. The ordinance was
an exact copy Of the ordinance which
was recently adopted in Lansing
Mich, with the exception of the final
sections which were taken from an
ordinance now in effect in New AL
bany, Ind.
Monopoly Failed.
The fate of the Lansing jitney bus
business when controlled by such an
ordinance is not the one which is eX-
pected here, according to the Hub
bards. In the Michigan city the jitney
bus traffic was monopOlized under the
law and was then taken over by the
street car company.
However, the local street car COM
pany will never buy the South Bend
jitney bus traffic, or any part of il,
according TO drivers and bus owrers.
Mr. Hubbard stated Tuesday morn
ing that the ordinance had not been
drawn up TO favor either side Of the
question, but it seemed to treat in all
fairness both the street car company
and the jitney bus drivers.
Hubbard Talks.
I'VE secuted around in various cit
les" he said, land were finally told
that the Lansing ordinance was a
arrangement of the best
sections Of ordinances in effect in 9TH
er cities. We sent for a copy of the
ordinance which was forwarded US.
With the aid OF local attorneys it was
drawn up in presentable form for con-
by the local council"
Mr.. hubbard declared that copies
of the ordinance had been fled with
Mayor Keller and City Atty. Seebirt
some six weeks ago, with the supposed
agreement on the part of those Off
cials 10 place the matter before the
council. This was never done. ac-
cOrding 10 Mr.. Hubbard, and the orig
inators of the bill took it upon them
selves to see that each member of the
council was furnished with a copy.
Opposed to Law.
Discussion Of the ordinance was
light at the council meeting. members
refusing TO consider the matter until 1t
was brought before them in the usual
Councilman Miller was the
only one to speak in favor of the
move. while other members expressed
themselves against any type of regula-
ton for the present at least.
1T is true that this ordinance
should have come before Us in the
usual manner" said Miller but it is !
also evio ent that it is a fair set of
regulations, treating, as ii does, both !
sides Of the question impartially. /
personally feel that this council should /
take some step in this matter.
Councilman Lang. while declaring
himself in favor Of regulation of some
sort some time, refused To consider 1
the ordinance because il had not been !
presented to the council in correct !
form.
Action Unnecessary.
I'VE Go not know where il is from.
ne said. There is nothing in it that |
makes il imperative that we take II I
no for consideration 30 hurriedly. And |
=. b.o hrrC f.