THE GLOBE. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1880. THE REPORT OF THE TRAMWAY COMMITTEE.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 2061, 1 October 1880, Page 2

THE GLOBE. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1880. THE REPORT OF THE TRAMWAY COMMITTEE.

Fob the first time since the present City Council came into office, they have before them pretty fully the present state of matters with regard to the operations of the Tramway Company in the city. The very elaborate, exhaustive, and interesting report of the Tramway Committee brought np at last meeting supplies such an amount of information as must have opened the eyes of the Council, as it undoubtedly did those of the ratepayers. It most conclusively proves, too, the points wo have all along urged, viz., that the Council was entirely unaware alike of its own powers under tho Tramway Act, and also of the terms under which the Tramway Company is now running in the city. Now, however, they cannot plead this ignorance as an excuse for what we cannot but call a lamentable apathy to the public interest. The first point which strikes one on perusing the report of the committee is the number of diversions made —totally unauthorised —by the Tramway Company from their deposited plans. These are no less than eleven in number, some of them, notably in High street and at the South Belt station, being of great inconvenience to the public. It may here be noticed in passing that it is strange no trouble appears to have been taken by the Council to see the lines carried out according to the deposited plans, or at any rate to see that tho consent of the Council was obtained for any diversion. Let any citizen who has permission to take a draiu under tho footpath, say to the east, go to tho west, and he is hauled over the coals at once. The whole truth is that tho Council, with but few exceptions, have been positively afraid to do anything that would interfere with the operations of the Tramway Company. A dread of the Chairman of Directors, only equalled by that of children for the traditional Bogey, has paralysed them, and tho company, as pithily put by one member, not satisfied with getting a lease of the public streets, desire—and indeed have practically obtained —a freehold of them. On tho point of these deviations the recommen lations of the committee are explicit and plain. They contend that tho Councill shall have the sole right of saying in the interests of the public where the sidings and loop lines shall be placed. Otherwise there would be simply, as appears to be desired by the chairman of tho company, a monopoly of the streets granted to the company to the exclusion of all other traffic. What the city might expect under such a state of things may be gathered from a threat once used by the Autocrat of All tho Tramways to the City Council —viz., that he would, if he chose, cover the whole of Cathedral square with lines, so as to prevent any traffic but that of the cars. To prevent any such an attempt as this, even in a modified form, the committee propose certain clauses which we hope the Council will adopt. They deal with the questions of loop lines, repairs, speed round corners, &c, We next come to the real gist of the whole matter, viz., the dispute between the cabmen and the Tramway Company. Here again we cannot but think that it shows most forcibly the peculiar friendliness or consideration evinced by the Council towards the Tramway Company, when it is seen that, although great public inconvenience results, it is not until the cabmen themselves bring matters to an issue that the Council at all bestir themselves. Then it is for the first time that they become aware that a proclaimed cabstand has been cut through by the tram line unauthorisedly. Surely this seems to partake somewhat of the conduct of Lord Nelson when he did not want to see an unwelcome signal. The Council in all its dealings with the Tramway Company, more especially in this matter, have shown as much consideration for its interests as if they were representing the Tramway Company, and not the citizens. There can be no doubt of this, that under clause 101 of the Tramway Act the Company have no power to monopolise that part of the public thoroughfare, and this being so, the recommendation of the committoe to remove the tram-cars from the footpath, leaving the approach to the station, as it should be, open to the public generally, is one that should be adopted. Before leaving this point we may just refer to what appears to us to be the height of—well, we were going to say impudence, but perhaps it would be better to use a milder term—assurance. The directors, in a letter to the committee regarding this proposition, say " that in the interests of public safety," they cannot accede to the request. This tender solicitude for the " public safety (i.e., their own interest) is really touching. Since when, we would like to ask, has the Company become so solicitous for tho public safety ? Do they not now shunt their cars in the midst of a crowded thoroughfare with such a regard to " public safety " as to make it positively dangerous for pedestrians about every quarter of an hour during the day ? Do they not run their trams through the busiest part of the city at a speed quite inconsistent with "public safety"; and yet, in the face of these well-known facts they have the audacity to plead consideration for the public safety as a reason for the retention of a monopoly of the approach to the footpath at the station. How the chairman and his colleagues must have chuckled over the insertion of those words intended to catch tho unwary councillors. No doubt it appeared to them that it was time, as Shakespore puts it, " to assume a virtue if they had it not." The meddlesome public have been wanting to know, you know. Some very disagreeable truths have been spoken out loudly, and it was therefore necessary to take a high moral stand, and put their refusal to entertain tho proposal on the ground of a tender regard for " public safety." Wo feel sure, however, that this new born solicitude for the interests and safety of the public will be appreciated at its proper value, and that, like Mr. Pecksniff, the chairman and directors will meet with their reward for tho highly proper sentiment thus expressed. We hope the Council will for . once deal with this subject from a public point of view, and not with that amount of tenderness towards the company usually displayed. We do

not wish for one moment to see the operations of the Tramway Company hampered or impeded unnecessarily or arbitrarily, but -when it comes to a question -whether Mr. John Evans Brown or the City Council and citizens are to have the control of our streets, we are inclined to believe that it should be the latter. The time has now come when a stop must be put to the present state of things. The Tramway Company are carrying matters with far too high a hand, and they will have to come down a peg or two. Let the Council carefully consider the report of the committee, and we feel sure they will arrive at the same conclusion that wo have—viz, that in the interests of the citizens, and as a matter of justice, their recommendations should be carried out. We trust they will give due weight to the anxiety the company shows to conservo the public safety by desiring to retain the stand next the footpath, and admire the pure and unselfish patriotism which has evidently dictated their refusal to accept the proposition of the committee. As a whole, the report of the committee is a fair and straightforward statement of facts, and wo are glad that there are in the Council some members who can thus independently express their views on a public question.