New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-02-19
4RGTTNG 1BOUT RAPID TRANSIT.
APPLICATION For A COMM sSION OPPOSED By
PROPERTY HOLDERS.

| APPLICATION FOR A COMM >SION OPPOSED By
PROPERTY HOLDERS.
Tho oppIication OF John VI. bowers on behalf Of the
Eopd Transit Commissioners. for a commission 10 deter
mino whether or rot the rapid irarsit line proposed
hv the Comml, shall Ice butt. In spite of the
fact that owner, II onc-half property along the
proposed line have not consented To IT, was argued
before the General Term of the supreme Court Fe''"r
dnv \ number of propcry-Owuers along Madison
ave Objected ana they Ncrc rep-'~,otcd in court by
Wheeler II. Pcckiam. William II. MIorA and Charles
II. kuoN.
Fx,Iudgc Arnoux first addressed the Court after
Mr. Bower, made hi, foima application. Mr. ArnonN
said he appeared for Charlie, \. Damn. John W. Am
bfo-o. Henry g.. M,rquand j. iiar-cn Rhoadc- Martin
d. Brown. Henry H. Ku-cIs, lsaac stern. john D.
,ayback. Charle. J. Clark John \. rcach. stephen
smith. william Bfookned. Grant .. Schlc>. and 2l3
other owner, Of property ln Nadi-onavc. bct~c"n
Forty fourth AMI Ninety -iNth -. Mr.. ArnouN said
that hi, clients objected ~ the appointment 81 the
commission for the following reasons:
a. on the ground that The petition accompanying
the papers docs not show any jurisdiction Ia thl7 court
o. Because aid report does not contain such plan
OF construction T. provided by the statute.
90 Bccause said report docs not show tho " mode
of Operation a, I" p5oyidei by nS statute hm m.
railway il 10 be an underground road or an elevated
road.
Of much OF the railway ns Is T. be bull. on
"vIaduct.T
~ IL does not show the ma0ner Of construction
OF much Of the railway !, 10 hc on depressed
structure
4, 1t does not show the Of construction ot
much OF the railvny ~ u be hullt ia tunnel
(-i II does not show the extent Ia which my
street avenue other pubic place. IS IL bo en-
crvachcd upon.'
%, 1t does not show the minimum or maximum
number OF stations, or the maximum or minimum d,
lance between stations. or fix the place Of stations.
Mr.. ArnOux argued for some time aud made u large
number Of technical objections 10 tho work accom-
plishcd BY the Commissioners. and iecond that they
had proceeded according TO Inv. Franci, VI. Scott
| also represented number Of property owners nnd
made formal objections:
a. 1t does not show ~ 10 n large part ~ caci
contemplated route whether The railway 8 Ia be- au
underground road. M elevated rad. depressed
road.
~ II doe. not show the manner Of construction
81 80 much II the proposed rA""! a. Is {" b" con
structnd on u "Nliuct
90 IL doe not show the manner 81 c0ns'ru' ton
Of much of the PROPOSED railway T. 90 hc con
structcd in depressed -tru,ture."
a. IL doe not show tl" manner ~ construction
" 80 much Of the proposed railway /, e. Doe
structcd ~ " tunnel
90 1t doc, show the extent u which any street
avenue, or other pubic place, IS - be eucroaohcd
upon
~ II doe not furnish the matcrill necessary for
N" formation 81 Intelligent opinion "a. b. the EN-
cheney Of the prpO-d railway.
a. II doe not show the minimum maximum
number 81 stations, or The mLNimuu minimum Dis
tnncc between stations
Wheeler H. reCkham spoke next. and after him Mr..
Bowers answered all tho arguments Presiding Justice
Van Brnt and Justice, Oiilcn and Patterson Listened
10 Thee argument, and reserved their decision The
about S2ipo'oOOO. owner rcWcscrtug -" 900 OHl
have consented 70 allow the inr to De built and
owners representing property worth -1a5.OtD 900 OBJ
Icct The oihcr7 have not been heard fiVm