The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1879-05-17
BROOkLrN RAPID TRANSIT
Arguments Pro aud Con Before the General
Term az ronghkeepsIe.

PoUGHKEEPsIE, May 16. The hearing
upon the motion to adopt the report of the
Commission appointed to locate the route OF the
elevated railroad in Brooklyn was had before
the General Term justices. Barnard. Dykman
and Gilbert. to-day. Henry j. Scudder opened
in support Of tho motion. He said that the
arrears Of taxes in Brooklyn amountto 100000
600. and the property upon which these taxes
were imposed has become OF so little value
that the owners will not attempt TO redeem
II or pay taxes. and as they are increasing. he
held that the only remedy is to furnish means
of transportation by which the population shall
be led into tho vacant portions Of the city. and
taxpaying inhabitants added. who shall lift tho
burden. which otherwise will break down the
city financially. With New York. it was a ques-
tion of pros perity; with Brooklyn. n question
of life or DEATH He charged that the persons
opposing the construction OF the road in par
ton street. are either acting upon
prejudices and misconception fomented
10y parties having other and selfish interests. or
they are entirely mistaken in their views OF the
consequences. He said that no question OF the
action OF the Brooklyn Common Council is
properly before the Court The main issue pre-
sented to the Commissioners is. will the con
struction and operation Of the road damage tho
property in front Of which II passes To such an
extent as to outweigh the public interest and
necessities. and Justify the individual owners IN
preventing the construction Of the road? He eX-
hibited TO the Court certified copy OF report
OF the Common Council Committee favorlng the
construction OF the road.
Edgar Nj. Cullen. who appeared Tor Brooklyn
property holders generally. denied the validity
OF the report on the Mayors Commission III
had no power 70 make any other than an abso-
lutte location OF the route. and no right to say TO
the company you can 60 through either Fulton
or Washington street He argued that the ap-
plicaton To- the Supreme Court for cOmmis-
sion should have been made 10y the Common
Council Comm.ssioners. and not 3y me rhpid
transit company, and cited various decisions IN
| support OF that Wow.
| EX-Dstrict Attorney Winchester Brltton ap-
pearcd for the Myrtle avenue property holders
He said that ninety-nine persons out oi n nun
dred residing upon the streets over which the
| road is 10 pass agree that Il Will reduce thelr
| property al the way from twenty 70 forty per
| cent. Therefore. suppose IL Will be n public
| benefit ought the Court 10 authorize It's con-
| struction II is more than question OF law
| IL is question OF legislation 10 determine the
| great question of public policy, and Whatever
| may be the result. the responsibility rests with
| the Court. The existing permanent debt OF
| Brooklyn Is s2s 900 900. Taxation falls almost
| exclusively upon real estate and property is
| now hurdened almost beyond its value lie
| predicted that II the proposed road Is built IN
| three years the debt OF BROOKLYN Will 30 TO pro-
| test and the city become bankrupt.
| CORPORATION Counsel De Witt appeared Tor
| the Fulton avenue property owners. lie SAID
| there were only two ways to secure rapid
| transit-one was 10 buy 1t and the other was 70
| flch it, and he was in favor OF the former mode.
| He urged that Fulton street should be exempt.
The assessed valuation in that street is tlo5OO..
| 900; IL may be safely said that one-twentieth ot
has been sworn TO that II the road goes through
there the property Will be damaged to the
| amount OF 81 800 900. Mr. Scudder made a
| brief reply. Then the papers were handed up.