The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-03-23


a member of the Erie Investigation Com
mittee, sin deciding upon the respective
merits OF the different rapid transit projects, y
but 1--WE have all along been anxious TO pass
rapid transit bills" Mr.. Lincoln speaks for
the Assembly Committee on Railroads, of
which he is a member, and the people will
believe what he says. The ''trouble," how
ever, seems to have suddenly vanished when
the wealthy Third Avenue City Railroad cor
poration and the wealthy President Of the
Harlem Railroad made their appearance in
Albany, and the anxiety" to pass rapid
transit bills seems to have increased about the
same time. The ''merits" of the Third Avenue
and Vanderbilt projects were made speedily
and strikingly apparent. Prior to their
happy advent the incompatible Lincoln had
been sceptic. The inducements to faith
in any proposition were inconsiderable.
'Gideon's band" failed to see the way
to glory. Gilbert and Beach and Gardner,
and the rest of the small fry, might do to
daily with, but not to tie to. The session
was progressing. No wonder that Lincoln
and his merry men, as ''willin'" as Barkis,
should be torn with anxiety and bewildered
on the question Of respective merits" A
way out of their dilemma was open to them,
it is true Mr.. Eastman had introduced O bill
which would relieve them of the trouble of
deciding between rival projects and insure
the success of rapid transit tor which they
are SO anxious" by placing the whole sub
ject in the hands of a commission to be APP
pointed by Governor Dix. But they had no
faith in such a measure. 1t required the
persuasive arguments of two wealthy cor
porations to remove their doubts and per-
plexities. The corporations arrived. So did
the arguments. Lincoln and his merry men
are now true believers, and Vanderbilt and
Squires are their prophets.
Now, we make no appeal to Mr.. Lincoln,
but we ask members of the Legislature who
have respect for their reputation to consider
these plain facts. The rapid transit franchises
for the city of New York belong to the people
of the city. The question of where, how and
by whom steam railroads shall be built in the
city are questions in which they are directly
interested, and which they should be allowed
to decide. 1t is proposed to create commits
sion of leading New York citizens, to be ap-
pointed by Governor Dix, whose appointments
all claim popular approval, which shall have
the right to decide between the different
projects for steam railroads and to insure the
construction of such roads. Both Mr.. VAN
derbilt and Mr.. Squires would have the right
to go before such commission with their
orI {bo,yc oh ha IN ho
the best for the city and for the public accom-
mediation they would be allowed to construct
their roads. What honest objection can there
be to the creation of such commission?
But Mr.. Vanderbilt and Mr. Squires want
special and exclusive charters from the
Legislature. They make friendly bills
! join teams and ask for franchises
Third avenue, the other on Fourth avenue
starting from the same depot, stopping at the
same points and ending at the same terminus.
Can two such lines, only two blocks apart, be
honestly needed or honestly intended for the
use of city travel? There is evidently
a little colored boy somewhere. Either
Mr.. Vanderbilts line is intended only
as an extension of his present Fourth
avenue nuisance, for the accommodation
of the freight and passengers of his through
roads, or the franchises are sought for
the purpose of "plastering" the avenues and
killing all rapid transit. There is at least
danger of this, for the proposed '.for-
feit'' is in each case large sized
manikin and this should be quite
sufficient to make all honest representa-
tives vote against these special and sus-
picious charters and in favor of the commits
sion which the people of New York desire.
For we are now between two classes of tyrants.
There are the street railway companies, who
have their long time franchises, and who OPP
pose rapid transit as earnestly as the old stage
coach propretors opposed railroads, who saw
in the approach of the new enterprises the de-
struction of landed estates and local village
life, of hares and pheasants and foxes. They
find the possession of their railways a revenue,
and they oppose any plan that may limit their
revenue, no matter how much it may be de-
manded by the people. On the other hand we
have the narrow-minded old fogies who preach
the doctrine that there should be no improve
ment of the city unless in the business
and built-up sections that all plans
for widening streets or building boule-
wards are against the spirit Of true
economy. THIS is the argument which was
made against the Central Park, and if it
had been accepted that beautiful garden
would now be wilderness of rocks and
marshes, of shanties, goats and geese We
cannot begin to say how much New York
owes to Central Park, nor how much she
owes to that resolute spirit of enterprise
which has done so much to improve the
upper part of the island, rescuing it from
waste and decay, and making it the homes of
taste and wealth.