The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-02-26

mr. Frlnc0's Rapid Transit BILL
Whatever may be thought of the bill intro
duced in the Assembly by Mr. L. Bradford
Prince in other respects, it has at least the
merit of conforming to the new amendments
engnfted on the State constitution. The
constitutional difficulty consists in the pro-
hibition to ''pass private or local bill'' in
any one of long list Of enumerated cases, in
Guiding among others the granting to any
corporation, association or individual the
right to lay down railroad tracks" Before
the adoption of this amendment it was COM
petent for the Legislature to pass any act it
pleased creating corporation to construct
either an ordinary street railroad or steam
road through the streets of this city. But
under the amended constitution no local bill
can be passed authorizing either the municipal
corporation or any private corporation to lay
down railroad tracks, and nothing can be
done on this subject except under general
laws applicable to all parts of the State.
In framing such general law there is q
double difficulty, both parts of which Mr..
Prince seems to have surmounted. One part
of the difficulty consists in frami ng a consti-
tutional law which would authorize the city
to construct rapid transit road on its own
account with the funds or credit of the city
treasury, making the road municipal public
work like the Croton Aqueduct or the Central
Park. There has for some time ceased to be
any dispute or doubt as to the authority of
the Legislature to do this within certain pre-
scribed limitations as to the consent of prop
erty owners or judicial action if they should
grave objections to the construction of rapid
transit roads by the city, and the most i'm
portant part of the problem is to devise some
constitutional method for the building of such
roads by associated private enterprise. Mr..
Prince has taken this problem in hand and
seems to have solved it. He has framed bill
which empowers the municipal authorities of all
the cities of the State to determine the routes,
prescribe the plan of construction and fix the
rates Of fare of all such roads which they may
deem necessary for the interest or conven-
fence of their respective cities, subject always
to the constitutional requirement of the con-
sent of the owners Of property along the
route, or, failing this, judicial decree.
But had his bill stopped here it would have
been exposed to all the objections which lie
against the construction of such works at the
expense of the municipal treasury. The great
difficulty was to find constitutional method
o. authorizing private company to make and
own the road and receive its profits. Since
the amendments this can be done only under
general law, which gives no private indi-
vidual or corporation any privilege to which
all others are not equally entitled. Mr..
Prince does not cut this Gordian knot but
unties it. When the route, plan and
rates of fare of proposed road have
been determined the bill makes it the
duty of the city authorities to sell the
privilege of building. running and re-
ceiving the profits of the road at public auc-
ton to the highest bidder, who is empowered
to associate other individuals with himself
and form corporation for conducting the
enterprise. This is entirely consistent with
the amendment which forbids any private or
local law for laying down railroad tracks. The
bill confers no power upon New York which
will not be equally shared by all the cities of
the State, and it opens the door to perfectly
free competition among oil citizens for the
privilege Of building and owning the road
Everybody has the same right to put in his
bid, and the one who offers tho city the best
bargain and gives proper security for perform
ance is entitled, with his associates, TO form
corporation for this purpose. We cannot
see that this bill is open to any constitutional
objection; but whether it is in other respects
the best that can be framed is a question
which should not be hastily decided.