New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-05-06
MANHATTAN OFFERS TERMS.
THE COMMISSIONS PLAN REJECTED.



pany to the commissioners propositions was received
The answer full and complete. but Is so wofeo
that 10 open, field for debate The manner III WHO"
this insufficient and cvasye reply was received ~
the commissioners Indicate that IL viii b. sc'croi
weeks, and possibly months, before The SURRENDER W
the Manhattan Company will be completed. me
answer of the Manhattan Railway Company, whiic
full Of such phrases as "lour Honorable Bcdy treats
the commission II II petnlant rhili. Inc
per cent clause Of the commissions proposition
Is rejected and two substitutes are offered Tor H.
The meeting wa, held IN The home Of William
steinway. president Of the Rapid Transit Commission,
No. 90 Gramcrcy Park. nj O'Clock. Mr.. steinway
presided. All the commissioners were present. John
NJ Bowers counsel and John Bogari. engineer OF the
commission were also there. When Mr.. Stcinway
called the meeting order all the commissioners
looked anxious. The representatives Of the Manhat
ian Company had not arrived with the long delayed
answer To kill time. Mr.. BuSc read in almost In
audible tone protests from property owners in
various parts of the city.
Afr MIR. Bushe had read for few minutes. Mr.
Bowers Interrupted him BY announcing the arrival OF
two representatives OF the Manhattan Company.
minute later cx-Judgc John +. Dillon ana Julien r.
Davies Of counsel for the Manhattan Company
tered TIE They had brought with them the
company's TO the commissions proposition
No time lost In formaliics. Ex-Juice Dillon
said TINT he and MIR. Davies the legal repre-
sentaives of the Manhattan. Mr. Davies read the
answer of the Manhattan Company which was sub
pended TO the answer was an estimate OF the cost OF
Tho extensions proposed by the Rapid Transit Com
missionrrs. The estimate was prepared by Colonel
f. K Hahn. second vice president and general man
ager Of tie Manhattan Railway.
George j. Gould. president Of the Manhattan Rail
way Company. signed the answer 1t was III part
as follows:
The Manhattan Railway Company has carefully con.
sfercd the resolutions Of your honorable BODY passed
March II and April 10 and bcss leave TO present " ~"
xttfh snsef
]. The cost construction, in compliance with these
resolutions estimated by engineers VIII be about
the s23 600 oo0 irrespective OF the payment OF
DAMAGES to abuttng poprtyho'dcs The experience OF
,hs compny has been such that 1t may be reasonably
anticipated several millions of dollars should be IN
cuded IN the OF the proposed new lines Tor 'hiS
item Tho Manhattan Company has already paid OUT
sever million dollars in the settlement of similar claim,
along its present lines OF aroit and many suits are still
pending against It,
1t is asserted that the road would not require more
and afy-hfthst. the intersection Of harrow and
Greenwich SITS; 1t might need only two tracks IRON
gested that the Commission should amend its propo-
sition 10 conform with these ideas The answer
goes on:
o The provisions OF the seventeenth resolution Of
April 10 1898 that a failure with respect to any OF the
conditions. shall work forfeiture Of all new franchises "
OF NewYork is contrary to the spirit OF the pres
ent legislation upon the general subject
Mr. Gould suggests that the Commission should
amend its resolutions by inserting reservation In
accordance with Section Of the Rapid Trant act
Of 1891 which allows the Commission to extend the
times for the commencement and completion OF Inc |
work OF constructing roads for which 1t has |
granted franshses He also suggests the iiserton |
Of the following provso In the Commissions resolu-
lions:
Provic4d however tImc II any. unavoidably
coLstmed by tendency o: legal proceedings. shall
be deemed part OF any period time limited in this
act
The letter continues
L. The Manhattan Company would further suggest |
that the provision requiring the running OF continuous
past the Battery be modified In order to com
ny with the requirements OF the Commission, 1t would
the position OF the elevated road
Battery Park and to erect therein other col.
unns than those existing Ire Commission Is pro-
hbted by law from graIung any privileges 10 the com
lsny In Battery Park. |
5. In connection with the provisions Of the fcurteeth
resolution OF April II, providing that the Manhattan
Railway Company "sha further pay into the city treas
ury annually per cent OF It's net receipts" mAhng |
thereby It's gross receipts less and operating ex
penses. we would suggest for your consideration:
First-This provision would lay upon the Manhattan |
Railway Company immediate additional burden Of tan
alton. Notwithstanding several years must elspse before
the company derive any benefit from con. |
stguot!cn permitted 10 IL.
SecOnd-ln IL, cnect upon the receipts from lines |
formerly Of the NewYork Elevated Railroad Company this
requirement would result In mued aud final dispo
suOn fer the future VI controversy pending be-
tween the Manhattan Railway Company and the city Of
Ncw-Iork.
Third-The effect Of acceptance II this condition to |
pay a OF cent the net receipts the Man. |
haitian Railway Company would be to burden only |
the receipts OF the lines. but also the re.
eepts OF Manhattan Road from the lines which It
holds under lease the Metropolitan Elevated Railway
Company. Those lines desgnedly left untaxed by
Legislature. by Chapter $50 OF the Act OF 1872.
The Manhattan Railway Company pays in taxes |
Of oil descriptions about 100000 year Your honor.
able body suggests 10 the Manhattan Company that 1t |
should voluntarily take Itself burden will
involve expenditure @ from
TO 5000 in addition to all its other burdens Of
The professed object Of requiring the Manhattan Com.
tax upon It's net receipts is TO obtain
pensaon for the city OF Ncwfork for the franchises
conferred. measured by their value. 1t obvious that
the receipts of the Manhattan Company from its lines
In operation have no relation 10 the value OF these
franchises
As to the additional third tracks. it may be said that
II hore be profit the Manhattan Company from such
tracks. 50 far the NewYork lines are concerned the
city Is already provided for under the existing statutes
The position Is taken by Mr.. Gould that 1t would
be highly UNJUST 20 Impose upon the Manhattan
Company the payment OF compensation for the
'sfructiOn OF third tracks. Mr. Gould continues
1t is the hope Of the Beard Of the Manhattan Company
that the Commission will revise It's recent action In the
light Of these suggestions The company for
future consideration the question Of entering into any
absolute agreement build the extension from One.
hundred and sixty -second-st. to the city limits.
The Manhattan Company offers to accept the scheme
adopted BY the Comnson and 10 undertake to build the
lines end make the Improvements contemplated, the
conditions aud requirements t, be laid it can be
modified 5 herein suggested.
10 10 ready TO pay the city OF New-Yofk the same
compensation that fixed by the Legislature In the Act
Of 1855 In respect Of the NewYork lines viz Five per
upon the net Income passenger traffic. OF said
lines Of railway other the third track The
company Is willing to allow any question that might
with respect to the method OF eoSutng the tax to he
referred the Railway the State for the
time being for decision.
As alternative proposition. the company states that
Ia rcady To agree To IN he
upon the completion OF the lines sum that TO-
ecther with amounts that 1t is liable TO pay
shall equal three 90 per centum Of the net receipts o.
its entire system-meaning thereby the receipts
oneraonQ expenses which shall include