Morning journal and courier., 1883-03-06
Tuesday, March 6, 1888.

GOVERNOR CLEVELAND'S VETO.
 Governor Cleveland's action in vetoing the bill known as the Five Cent Fare bill has created not little stir in New York The elevated railroad system is deservedly un l popular there, and it was expected that the peoples governor would accede to the wish of the people and sign the bill. The plat form on which he stood in the campaign 1 contained these words: 1.-The public welfare demands that the various questions relating 1 to chartered monepolies and the methods of | transportation should be met and decided, l and we are in favor of the adoption of meas ures to restrict the growing power of such 1 monopoIies. The charges of corporations | which have taken the property of private | citizens for public use should be limited to the cost of service with 8 reasonable profit, ! instead of the mercenary exaction of all the traffic will bear'"
 On account of such utterances as this in their party platform,> and because they be- ieve that their party is bound to redeem the pledges thus made, many who were among Governor Cleveland's warmest supporters are now finding much fault with him, and some
 
 Jay Gould. The Governor in his message, which was an able one, treated the question partly as a matter of law and partly as matter of good faith. He took the ground that whatever may be the character and con duct of the elevated railroad monopoly, the State had, before it's character and methods were developed, made bargain in the na- ture of contract which precludes it now from reducing the fares without the consent of the corporations that have succeeded to the fran chises originally granted. The principal bar is to be found in the section of the railroad act of 1850, which declares that no such re- duction shall be made unless after official ex- animation it shall be found that the net in come of the companies has in the year last past exceeded ten per cent of the capital ''actually expended"
 The governor in his veto appears to stand on solid ground, but this does not prevent some very unpleasant insinuations being made. When the message was read in the Assembly Major Haggerty, who is good Democrat, declared that he recognized the language of the veto. It was not the first time that he had heard it. It's arguments were not unfamiliar. Those who hadh heard the arguments in committee against the pas sage of the bill had recognized them here, and they recognized thdhand that wrote the veto. The people of the city of New York knew what they wanted when they demanded the passage of the Five Cent Fare bill. They had right to demand it and they did. The corporations had again stepped in and dem onstrated to the people that they were all powerful. It might not be polite to say this, but it was certainly manly. And there has been even more direct talk than this.
 The question of sustaining or overriding the veto will come up tomorrow and it will probably be sustained. But it does seem as if the people of New York ought to have some protection against such swindles as have been perpetrated by the elevated railroad managers. As the New York Times says ''Stock watering, combinations to destroy competition, tricks and devices through leases and agreements to confuse interests and evade obligations, should be hereafter prevented, and financial enterprises affecting public rights should be kept on the basis of capital actually expended and held to a method of management in which every prin- ciple of equity shall be observed