New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-04-23
TIE HUDSON RIVER BRIDGE.
HEARING Before TIE uOU:E COMMERCE COM
NfrTrr-ANoTurG BILL INTRODUCED

AIRING BUrORE IHE HOU:E COMMERCE OOM
Ntrrrr-ANoTHrG BILL INTRODUCED.
v,.rtn,ton. April .2--rrc House Commerce Com
r,t.c .,ye person, opposing and persons aVorhs '"'
Ncv Yorl, and Ncw-Icr.ey Bidgc proposition ne"'ns
thl, afternoon The members OF IN" Spec'ii co''",o
nj, the West End Association OF newborn (WHICH Is
,,.,.,a n the BID present ut tho committee room
vcre W. W Mcfarland, Thomas :. Ornistoh' James
Y. D. Card benjamin 7. Romainc and James A. Deer
,rc q, counsel for the committee. Messrs George w
Grrcn Philip D. Thompson. jr., and X. floyd CHrN
r,prcsented TN, New York and New'jesey Bridge Nom
many I'm favor Of tho bill Willis Holly Mayor "rah'S
nrvote secretary presented to the committee hter
from Mayor Grant containing protest against the
passage Of tho bill. a.
Holly ~ Mayor Grants letter protesting against the
construction Of the bridge and the resolution Of the
Ncw.Yorl Common Council In the same lne Mayor
Grant I'm his letter also points out provisions OF Tue o
which he regards in conflict with the state cohstiV
tion and liable to lead conflict between the state
and National nuthoriti2s
James A. Deerlng Of the West End Association, also
protested on the ground that the approaches would
ruin vast amounts Of property the riverside portion
NJ the city, and that the railroad terminal iacillhes
would do much to decrease the value Of real estate
A brief presented the committee In behalf OF
the West End Association sets forth that the oP
moments O, the bill consider II wholly bad In form ana
substance. and that 1t could not be amended III "'
vav 10 remove It's objectionable features.
Mr. Lindenthal the engineer OF the North River
bridge Company also spoke in opposition TO tho BILL
giving as his reasons that the traffic the river
was not sufficient 70 Justify building two bridges, ana
ihnt II there were two bridges one would Kill the
other and II would end In there being no bridge AZ
all W. w. Mcfarland also Of the West End Asso'
citation. opposed the bill.
Philip D. Thompson, 1r.. counsel for the company
prefnccd his remarks with the statement that the pro
posed bridge had been approved by the secretary OF
War Tho company asked the passage OF the bill so
that no question might hereafter arise as TO It's 90
,truciion Of free navigation. The North River b1usc
ho asserted had been authorized by Congress against
tho protest of the people OF NcwYork, and In viola
| lion Of the statutes OF Ncw.Jcrsey and New-lok
Mr. Iindcnthnl denied that this so. and said no
crooked had been employed ~ secure the Charter
| from the Legislature.
! Another bin TO authorize the Newlork nnd New
Jersey bridge companies ~ construct bridge across
the Hudson River between Ncw-York CITY and the
state OF NcwJcrscy introduced by Mr. Dunphy
today. 1t provides, among other things, that the
clear height and span OF the bridge shall conform
10 the dimensions In Hike structures heretofore Az
lorlzed hy Congress for the protection OF Navigation
al New-YOrk City said river and that II snail not
be south Of one hundred and forticthst, Ncw-forh.