New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-06-02
TILE .N4REET QUESTION.

The veto by Governor Cornell of the bill
to rebuild Washington and Fulton Mar
kcts was simply the formal sentence OF
those concerns to doom long ago pro-
nounccd. The inevitable tendency of all
retail trade in New-Yorl is to follow GUS
tom n0rthward. Dry goods and groceries
among staple supplies, the restaurants and
hotels among caterers, and the theatres and
other amuscmcntS, have long since wisely
0beycd this natural demand. Only the large job
hers among the former remain down town. The
hotels in the lower part OF the city are half rcstau-
rants, and, with few exceptions, furnish Ony
lunch. The markets, which supply nnc-tenths Of
the food consumed in the hotels, rcstaurantsand
private houses, which have all gone far north
ward, arc the only large retail business cStab-
lishmcnts which have resisted this law Of trade
We know that the market men themselves
are not ignorant of the mistake they have
made. Their only arguments i'll defence of
their Obstinacy are that their present stands
have cost them very large sums in pay
mcuts to influential officials and political
assessments, and that Fulton and Washing
ton Market sites are convenient to the pro-
duccrs who supply the markets. The plain
answer to these shallow reasons is that the
payment of political assessments was simply
foolish encouragement to further IKE
taxation so long as the market men
rented stalls in city markets and
that the customer who buys of them is as
much entitled to consideration in the matter
OF the convenience and chcapncss of delivery
as the one who supplies the producc-and
possibly to little more, as it is
the consumer who finally pays for the
arrangement. This latter argument may
be also readily answered by saying, what
is apparent to all, that the ferry and railway
convcnicnccs which now exist there will read
lily follow to any other market established for
the benefit of uptown residents. All
these are mere matters of course, which the
law of supply and demand will regulate.
There is really no interest calling for the
retention Of these markets except the inSlg-
nlcant one represented by various small
establishments III their Immediate nrighb0r-
hood. And these restaurants and beer
saloons will only too quickly follow to
the new market. Certainly it is not to the
interest of the city to rebuild or retain the
present r0OlIcrics, since the annual loss, over
and above the receipts, is about Tl3O,OOO.
We feel confident that tho opening of the
new Manhattan Market, at Thirty-fOurth-st
and North River, which Is to take place on
June s, will compel change in the policy of
the city market men. The largest and most
entcrprisng of these dealers have already
taken stands there. and in the end they will
abandon those they hold in the lower mar
kcts. The management Of the new market
is by men whose names are Il guarantee of a
cautious and yet energetic policy Their COM
bination, preliminary to opening, in a single
stock company of the largest dealers with the
largest purchascrs-the chief hotel and rr,tlu-
rant propictors-was just such stroke of
policy Us must give confidence to the enter
nrSn.