Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1921-06-04
STREET CAR co.
SURRENDERSI IT'S
CITY FRANCHISE
Asks Service Board for In.
determinate Permit Under
Which to Operate.
QUESTION OF RIGHTS UP

The Indianapolis Street Railway
Company today surrendered its fran
chise with the city of indianapolis
and asked the public service COM
mission for an indeterminate per-
NIT under which to operate. Pa
pers indicating the company's de-
cision to surrender its contract were
filed both with the commission and
at the office of the city clerk.s The
action was taken under the 1921
law. which were promulgated yester-
day
Franchises of the Broad Ripple Trac-
tion Company, with the town of Broad
Ripple and of the Indianapolis Tele
phone Company with the city of Indian
apolis slso were filed. Neither company
10 operating utility, but both continued
to hold their franchises.
The action of the Street Railway Com
pany opens up the entire field of discus
sion as to the rights of the city and the
rights of the public service commission
when the city has no contract with the
company. The public service commission
has recognized the right of the city 20
control service, but II assumes the right
to control rates and other matters con-
nected with the operation Of the company
TWO QUESTIONS
OPENED BY ACTION.
Two Of the biggest questions resulting
from the action Of the company are those
Of whether the company shall continue
to pay its franchise tax of $4,000 a year
and whether the company shall continue
to pave between its tracks as required by
, the franchise which now no longer exists.
These questions will be discussed al a
conference at 0 o'clock Wednesday morn
ing to be attended by Mayor Charles w.
Jewett, the members OF the board of
public works. Samuel Ashby. corporation
counsel for the city, and officials of the
Street Railway Company. Mr.. Ashby
viii present the city's stand at the reg
ulRr meeting Of the city council Monday
night The council may attend the con-
ference Wednesday.
The company has refused TO pay its
installment of franchise tax due April 1.
Under the franchise 1t had until June l
In which to make the payment, but 1t
continued TO refuse Mr.. Ashby has an
nounced his intention to sue for Che pay
ment, unless an agpeement-can be rese.hed
at the proposed conference 1t is the
contention of the city that the company
should continue to pay the tax, although
not legally obligated to DO 50.
PAVING QUESTION
LARGEST ONE.
The question of paving between the
tracks is expected to be one Of the larg
est that viii result from the surrender
of the franchise. The company has been
paving between the tracks and maintain
ing all such pavements. 1t now proposes
that the city shall lay the pavements and
the company maintain them. The city
contends that the franchise arrangement
should continue. The public service COM
mission Is believed to look with favor
upon the position Of the company.
with the surrender of the franchise the
public service commission has undisputed
control over rates. The commission has
indicated its attitude to be that the com
pany should be relieved of obligations
which rightfully belong to the city and
that the rate of fare shall be maintained
as low as possible. 1t is not probable
that the surrender of the franchise win
mean an increase in fare and it may even
tually mean q decrease, officials declare.
The new rate of fare, 8 cents cash and
cents for each transfer, is reported
to be operating successfully. Immedi
ately after it was installed the number
of passengers carried increased and the
revenue of the company increased.