The Morning Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Okla.) 1919-1927, 1922-01-08

supplied with adequate transporta-
ton.
Tho st. Louis line was within two
blocks Of The tulsa street Railway
COMPANY line on South quincy and
caused duplication OF aervice that
viii no, exist on the east side when
the new line is finished.
The Tulsa street Railway com
pauy mas proposed 10 the city com
mission and the corporation com
mission that 10 be- allowed to operate
trtckirEs trolley from its terminus
at Fifteenth ana quincy east on l'it-
fccuth, south ON Rock k'ord and east
ou Eighteenth 10 Utica, serving
virtually all uf those formerly served
los thr Oklahoma Unions ~. Louis
iu, several property owners along
the proposed trickicHA trolley route
Appeared boiOto thc city COmmiSsion
lti.1s ana protested against rsthb
l0ehiug 10. Cly Attorney Duncan was
tlHu opposed 10 IL.
Addison declared at Fridays come
mission meeting that he would put
enough policemen on S. Louis aVo-
uu, TO UJryrui tho tearing up Ol
tracks. and that they would carry
nut hs instfutuuuH unless "a court
order should bee issued rcstrainiug
them from Interference with the
work.
steiner Backs Jp Commission.
Sfro.i CommIHslOuDT - a steiner
ln the uuly member ut the city com-
mission who hr1 Insisted that the
Oklahoma Union bo allowed 20 rr-
move itt tracks tie voted FOR this
removal whom the oklahoma Union
first requested permission from the
t..s. ftt
change hia vote since thou. II" ho-
Itrycs the corporation commission
puacHsca tho powcrs 1t has cNor-
Ciscd.
steiner said Saturday night nu-
morOua 81 LOUIS property owners
had called him at his home and de-
clarcd they were glad the line had
been removed, aud added hope
that II might not be r-"athPllshcd,
A motion was passed by the mayor
and commissioners Friday without
Stcincr's vote--OrdcrinB the city at
turucy 90 fight the corporation COM
missiurs anticipated order, and II
necessary to apply to the supreme
court for a writ OF prohibition %
prevent the Oklahoma Union from
carrying 1t out. such writ would
not now be Of service, ns the line
has already been removed.
Duncan has not yet decided what
his next step VIII be.
4 Daylight job.
we believe we were acting with
proper and sufficient authority In
removing our 81, Louis tracks,
crow explained saturday night
"Our attorneys advised uS that the
corporation commission had contro
over such matters, and we went be.
fore that body and laid our card,
on the table. We showed that tn,
st Louis line IN not paying; tha
there IL duplication of service IL
the southeast section, ana that 4
would cost ua abou, $4,000 for oul
share OF the paving along n ca
| line that brings no returns ON th'
lnYe..::,s.,;. our petition was grant
| ad and we proceeded to tear up thu
track In broad daylight. There Il
nothing pow 10 prevent the puvini
| contractor from satisfying the prop
erty owners by laying the pavement
| We left the street In good condition
"As soon ~ possible we expect 4
extend our line east on fGlevontl
street into a district that need
transportation facilities much great
or than our line is needed on 81
Louis avenue"
THAT section OF the st. Louis lin
south of Fifteenth In To be torn N
AZ a later date, Grow said Tho fou
blocks OF track between Elcvcnt
and Fifteenth were removed fir,
hccause these sre the blocks TO /
paved and because the paving cor
tractor has been prevented froI
proceeding because the tracks wer
there,
That the corporation commissio
possesses power to regulate stree
railway companies, that the OklU
homa Union Railway company's \
Louis line was unremunerative an
was In n dlatrict whore service wa
duplicated. and that the commissio
is undoubtedly acting fairly when
changes line from a well serve
I dIatrIct 10 ona that In In naad ,