The Alderman, the Cable Road, and the Broken Promise to Double-Track Yesler

Seattle, April 11, 1895.

Dr. J. P. Sweeney, Chairman of the Railroad Committee, City—Dear Sir:

I was somewhat surprised on reading the Post-Intelligencer Tuesday morning, April 8, that the petition respecting double-tracking of Yesler avenue and Jackson street had come up. If I am not mistaken, you told me in person that it would not come up for some time. Believing you to be a man of your word, I was not at the meeting on Monday night to represent the signers of that petition.

In your statement you say “that the road had been robbed by former owners.” This is an untruth, and I am surprised that a man who is supposed to have the intelligence that an alderman representing the people of Seattle should have would make such a statement without positively knowing what he said was true.

The original road was built by J. M. Thompson and associates. They put in their money, and the road cost, single complete, $[illegible]. When hard times came it was my fortune to buy out the rest of the stockholders, as they were not able and willing to pay in any more money. There was never a bond sold on that line as long as I owned it. In August 1890, I sold the entire capital stock, being the only owner, of the Lake Washington Cable Railway Company, to L. S. J. Hunt and W. A. Underwood, the latter at present being receiver of the road, for the sum of $335,000 and a perpetual pass for myself and immediate family. They then organized the Seattle City Railway Company, and sold the road to that corporation, consideration I do not remember. When I sold the road it was earning not above all expenses between $175 and $200 per day, and was considered the finest piece of property in the city, and when they bought it it did not owe one dollar to anybody.

I should not have paid any attention to your remarks before the council if I had not intended to remain in this city, and I sincerely trust that in future before making remarks or accusing anybody of robbing anything you would post yourself so that you may know or would know what you are talking about. The petition itself, if true, was only signed by about eighty-three people. I did not deem it necessary to have more sign it, because it would be a very easy matter to get at least a thousand to sign it. Among other things, I understand you stated I was on the warpath, and had it in for the road. Now, I have not. I do not like them, and they know that. I forced them to recognize my pass through the courts, and they would not carry me today if they did not have to. The property situated along the line of Yesler avenue and Jackson street, by reason of it only being a single track, is worth one-half today what it would be worth if there was a double track on these streets, and the council that granted the original franchise granted it and provided that within a reasonable time they should double track. The new franchise, which I received from the council myself, compelled me to double-track both streets within five years from the date of that franchise. If that road had been run as a railroad should have been run they would have earned enough money and had a sinking fund to have had it double-tracked by this time, and I do not believe it is right for the council to grant an extension for another year, as stockholders of that road are able to put up the money to double-track it.

I also notice that by concurrent resolution you have forced the Union Trunk Line to run their Beacon Hill branch according to the terms and conditions of their franchise. Now, they are not any more able to run that branch than the Yesler avenue line is to double-track. It is a strange thing to me that you should force one road to live up to the terms and conditions of its franchise and let the other one go. Why is this?

It seems to me you are trying to hinder and injure people here who have built up this city and are helping outsiders who have never done anything. Besides, they can double-track the line for less money today than they will ever be able to do it again. Yours truly,

Adam E. Sander.