New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-06-04
Mr. CRiMMINs on THE TROLLEY.

In his reply to numerous protests against the
use of the uolley III the streets of New-l 0rk
Mr. John ID. Crimmins rather carefully con-
ceals his intentions regarding The street rail-
roads under his charge. lie does, however,
make several interesting denials and statements
of opinion lie says. that he has spoken for
himself alone and not for his associates, and
that no change Of motive power on their re-
Gently acquired lines has been formally adopted
or discussed. lie says, further, that he has
never thought the public would now approve
the general use of the trolley system IN New
York. and that there is no intention OF pro-
posing such a thing. We assume. therefore.
that the project which he is individually con-
sdering is the employment Of that system on
lines running under the elevated railroads. for
he leaves uncOntradictcd the common report
to that effect. 1t is conceivable that the troll
lev might be less of nuisance on SUCH routes
than elsewhere, but we see no reason to change
our opinion that it ought not to be tolerated
even there, partly for the reason that 1t would
not stop there. Having once possessed that
limited field, its advocates would push their
advantage shrewdly and persistently.
Coming to his own views respecting cleo
trical propulsion, Mr. Crimmins condemns the
use of overhead wires for illuminating ana
telegraph and telephone purposes as unneces-
sary and therefore reprehensible; "but II you
want electric power for cars he says, you
must use the trolley system" inasmuch as " the
conduit and storage battery systems are fail
ures up to the present time Ii that Is tfue'
then in our opinion we do not want electric
power for cars at the present time. Inc aD-
sence of the trolley is more desirable than the
presence of the electrically propelled car. But
there arc many experts who take more cheer
full view of the near future than Mr.. Grim
minis is able to take, and who refuse to be-
leve that it is the trolley or nothing
Mr.. Crimmns enlarges upon the incalculable
benefits which the trolley would confer upon
propcrty-owners wherever il went, and alludes
TO the way in which they are pressing and
crowding us every day on this matter" This
view of the question can be made to appear
far more impressive than it really is. Inc
same argument has often been employed be-
fore under somewhat similar circumstances
and its weight is generally exaggerated by
those who adducc it. 1t does not follow that
an undertaking which is likely or certain to
nut money in the pockets of few hundred OF
a few thousand persons is good for the whole
city. The general welfare is almost always
opposed to the immediate selfish interests OF
some individuals, and therefore laws are enact
ed to protect it. Mr. Crimminss general argu-
ment from special cases is specious. II carried
out to its logical conclusion it would equally
Justify conditions which would make existence
ntolerable.
Ncw-York is doubtless deficient in the means
of local transportation, and it is painful to re-
feet that protracted efforts have not accom-
plished much, if anything, toward solution
OF the problem of providing new facilities.
But it will be great misfortune if public i'm
patience with present conditions facilitates the
introduction of a new and dangerous nuisance
under the guise of benefacton. We can af-
ford much longer delay far better than we
can afford to surrender to the trolley. Some
things which communities differently situated
may enjoy great city is obliged to do with
ont. and this is one Of them. And yet we
frankly acknowledge that Mr.. Crimmns and
his associates are likely to have their way with
the municipal authorities unless prompt and
vigorous protest is made. They have many
advantages of position and utilization, and they
know how to use them.