Seattle Gives New York Millionaires Another Year to Fix Yesler Avenue

Shortly after the board of aldermen assembled, the report of the committee on railroads granting the receiver of the Yesler Avenue cable road an extension of one year from May, 1896, in which to double-track its line was taken up, and caused a heated and lengthy discussion. The report recommended that the petition of Isaac E. Sander and eighty others for the enforcement of the ordinance requiring the Yesler Avenue cable track to be double-tracked be not granted, and that the petition of the Seattle City Railway Company praying for an extension of one year be granted, provided that when the company does build, the roadbed as a whole shall be built in the most modern manner for cable railroads and of iron or steel instead of wood, as now.

At the conclusion of the reading of the report Dr. Jordan jumped to his feet and championed the cause of the petitioners. He said he did not believe in granting the millionaire owners, living in New York, any longer time in building a parallel line. They might just as well put the money in now when it would do as much good. He stated his connection with the road, and said while he was one of the stockholders the road was making $100 a day easy, and said it cost nothing to build it, and 'a damn sight less,' for that matter. He told how people were compelled to wade in mud to reach the down line, and accused the council of standing in with railroads.

Dr. Sweeney, chairman of the committee, said that the road had been robbed by former owners, and stated that the committee believed that in granting the time the city would enable the owners to put in a steel track, properly ballasted, and not a wooden one, as at present.

Jordan said that, although the road was considered at the time it was built to be a poor one, it is better than the much vaunted Front Street line at the present time. He said the parallel line is already built, but is covered up with earth, and the expense would be small in opening it up. He said that the former owners, of which he was one, bonded the road for $160,000 and never paid a cent of the bonds. At this statement Dr. Sweeney rose and read from a report submitted by Sander and others, in which they stated that $75,000 in bonds out of an issue of $100,000 had been sold, the balance of $25,000 being held. To this statement Dr. Jordan had nothing to say, except that the statement was false.

Lovejoy spoke in favor of granting further time. He said he believed the corporation, which for the past two years has been losing money on the road, should be granted further time, as at this time the city needs the help of these corporations in helping us out on big schemes, such as the canal. He said: 'I think these corporations should be helped at this time, and I also think it bad grace for former owners to try to crowd out the present company, now that it is losing money and the former one feathered its nest.'

The report of the committee was adopted, Jordan voting no.