New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-05-16
PART II.
MAY Is, 1893.
THE PAYMENT QUESTION.
A SPIRIT OF CONCESSION SHOWN.
NEARING AN AGREEMENT on RAPID TIAN7IT
Mr. CorLp's PROPOSITION.

AN amicable understanding with the Commission on
tie auestion OF compensation for the valuable priv.
leces offered TO the company hy the Commits sion.
Mr.. Gouid did not promise that the Manhattan dl-
rcc,orr would give ali that the Commission asked,
but he said that he would recommend To the board
that IL increase the percentage OF the net receipts
offered las, week by the Manhattan Company. The
result Of the meeting of the Rapid Transit Commits
sion yesterday showed plainly that the Commissioners
and the Manhattan directors were near under
standing the question OF compensation. This Is
practically the only question which the Commits
sioners and the Manhattan people differ.
The meeting yesterday held In William Stein
WAYS house, No. 26 Gramercy Park The Commissioners
themselves met first in executive session at
Mr.. Gould and Julien 4. Davies, OF counsel for the
Manhattan Company. came to Mr.. st,inway's house
at L. 80 o'clock Al O'Clock the Commissioners
took luncheon the invitation of Mr.. stcnway, who
was unable 10 so I, his dining room. Mr. Gould and
Mr.. Davies lunched with the Commissioners.
Mr.. stenway called the pablo meeting of the Com
mission TO order shortly after O'Clock. lie asked
II there was any communication from Controller
Myers the question OF compensation. Edward
Ienrqucs. of the Finance Department, answered that
be had communication from the Controller who was
unable 10 be present Mr.. llenroucs read the letter
which in part Is follows:
In accordance with your Invitation Of the 18th
Inst lrs to transmit the following objections to the
counter propositions made 10y a.. Manh titan Railway
in reply to your resolutions OF April 12th ,..
The frst offer Of the Manhattan Company. namely,
10 pay - per cent upon the net income from pas
sanger trahc Of the new lincs Of railway other than
the third track should no, De considered for an IN
slant by your honorable body. In the first place. IT
assumes that the grant Of the privileges for the third
tracks privileges whtch the company has for year,
been cndcavoring 10 obian-, OF no value ana that
assumption. agans, which nave 1rSncd IN my
former communications 10 y0ur board. has Already
been dlscredited ana ncstt,Ved by The conclusions
which you have reached. aud which form tir very
second place. this offer. even II II were unoblec'onaD
in other RESPECTS. would immediately lead to exactly
tiAn lat "a tlftl
pged In with the Manhattan Railway tommny-tht
colpEa;ion having offered the annual payment oI an
insignificant In settlement of an account which
T. believed 10 amount TO considerably over Slco'ooo
advantageous to the city, the most superficial
analysis VII show. That proposition is that The
cent Of the net receipts of It's entire sysiem-meaning
nery 5 ,n' Include s rSprdurcs rcmaiy made during
the year TO Keep the road ana ,qupncn, III SAFE ana
debt" or. in other words, moneys applicable TO
dividends.
The Controller submitted some figures from the re-
port Of the Railway Commission for 1891, showing
that the compensation TO the city 10y the second plan
would have been only s7i.so7 81 in that year. The
letter continues:
lions f % Ssv pnS S Sy EI'
he year isel. and those resolutions most
liberal TO the Manhattan Sompsny when ,na' cor
'Sirs track DIMENSIONS which as above stated
II has been seeking for wears y" c"h,roo his rs
~
But q price upon them and The road Is SIMPLY act
irg the part Of shrcwd purchaser. That they are
H. n1'Ss Comnsnys siev,tsa, proposition And
n. Ike any other axiom; tha, Tact sonld he mpcss'.
say that js truth l. LUMINOSITY clear 10 the common
sense Of 'hc hnmblcs taxpayer on Manhattan Islind
which probably annually nearly "ue-qrarcr OF
SIS entire actual Of construction 10y reason Of The
s,enId seek to abuse the advantages OF IT'S present.
position by debating surrender OF the lm,ic In,
relieve the peoples Necessity. Lkewi'e. J may say
that, having 10 view The urgent nature Of those ned.
n is certainly not my purpose. In end'aNorhH 10
protect Inc financial welfare Of the city. 10 take any
stand that win op,ra,e a, Hrr Ter 70 'h sp,s
h,iiey. however that the only salvation Of The travel
ling pnblic lies with the Manhattan Eoilwny Com nary
a. avoid the humiliang pcctacle 81 this cys h'nlv
Of franchise privIlcrcS Of enormous SaIuc. But
elevated roads are n" longer srecnlations inNmNra
enterprises: new lines corld be- built ~ quietly -
could be these extensions. and n offered ., pnbnf
sale. tie franchises for such rulcs would undoubtedly
be sold nfter spirited iddrs, at terms hirly ad.
vantageous to th. CITY II sem. 70 me- ,iersio Vt
ibis embarra sing though in,npera'le. crisis and
! therefore earnestly. hut with cutrc conhdcnce. be
nr"yide sT sncract to ,hc evscnci,s 81 The hour
thonid the Msnhatnn Railway Company refuse 20 meet
believe that whatever plan your Commission
adopts The ely should b. ssT cor rom N b Manhaii "
Railway Company. including that which II now nov,
entitled 70 receive under the Aet OF l-Os. ana uia
The method az computing tho percentages 10 De p'lu
should be- 30 arranged Ia insure an incras. w wv.
amount the receipts Of me Manhattan ,o,, .,hnt
Increase. 50 LONG ~ this l. done, ana me m',hDi
Of computation Is such ~ 10 avoid dispute ana con
sequenf litigation IL wonld seem 10 he gum narnn, rn
frain however. from expressing reerrt lnn, w ~
proposition contained IN my first comnc' Snad
BE- pad the increase of gross receipts UPON ,h,
completion o, The new cx,ens,"m SION. az r%cri"n
~ ascertainng the value Of The new franchi..,rs
have yet heard any yailn OF 'n q, he "nn
ms, should commend itself quite as mich 10 INC
railway company It does to the CIV
When Mr. Uenrianes had finished the reading Nr
,,e,nvar wanted n take up the Manhattan Company's
answer section BY section. but MT. Gould SAID 'na
womb no, DO necessary as the Manhattan Company
ana the Comm ssoners differed only on the qncsnon
~ compensation and the proposed extension 10 me c'
limits. Mr.. sieinway admitted that compen @'oh WIS
ia. ar4mportant question. Mr.. Gould and Mr. Dawes
said that they DID not agree with all that th' 'oh
iroller had said. This remark surprised no one ana
Mr. Gould and his counsel did not go into particulars
They did seem anxious discuss the controller
letter Mr.. Could however again said ina, ne oia
not believe the third track 10 ~ valuable conc,s
II would only relieve The through passenger ,ra,nc,
which was not profitable. Nearly an hpnr h'u m,m
spent In discussion In general way, when MI I''"
said
" before Mr.. oonld il that presented ny YOU
last week The discussion OF your per cent proposition
n simply n 81 valuable time. II would he Letter
10 60 right under the present law than TO scccus
10 vour . per cent proposition Mr.. Pu~he "SMn
Mr. Davies II he considered 100000 year to be fair
compens a'ion 20 tho cf'y a.,
q That Is not n fair question: Mr.. Davies replied.
" However a. have asked I wiz that pc
I,eve that the city ought not require compen alto
whatever. In view OF the fact that the sl ani..an
Company Is heing asked 80 expcnd such "rornon.
,un,s ~ money Improvements FOR the benefit OF
The city" ,,
Mr. Jnman said tina, The Manhattan COMPANY coinl
oct along without the Commission. and the Conm sion
eo,,d ret aloug without The Manhattan Company.
Mr. f;onld said that the Manhattan Company would
ie Obliged 10 borrow money. This made " inman
a., az After n pause Mr.. Inman said a. guess
r",r stockholders will take care OF yon on that
tyn.,iv Mr. steinway asked Mr.. s'arin n he hrd
ANYTHING 10 say. II haven't learned srsthlng.' Mr.
e. - reu,Icd that has caused me change my
nS a. 10 the per cent requirement first suggested
by me" ,,,o. g., n.a,,., ,h ,,...., a,
The t,vdsd debt In arriving at the Set receipts y Mr.