New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-05-07
FLYNN FRANCHISES VOID.
BROOKLYNS cold THIRTEEN AND EH-
MAYOR BOODY LIABLE TO INDICTMENT


ON THE CRossTowN SYSTEM.
Judge Walter Lloyd Smith. of the supreme
Court, yesterday, in Brooklyn. handed Gown a
scathing arraignment of Brooklyns FAMOUS COLI
Thirteen Board OF Aldermen. VINO. IN 1893
granted franchises under suspicious circum-
stances to the Nassau Electric Railroad system
Of Brooklyn Of which Patrick II. Flynn Is the
head The decision annuls the franchises Of the
road voted by the board. and the city authorizes
last night added to the CONSERVATION Of Mr.
Flynn and his friends b. revolng all the p rnltS
under which they are building an extended
trolley system through unoccupied streets in the
city.
The title Of the action is John Alamson against
the Nassau Electric Railroad Company and the
Kings County Electric Railway Company et al
Edward NJ. Grout. Judge Gaynors law partner
and Jesse johnson represented Adamson' "hhe
the defendant companies had for counsei Emu
Root. James c. Church. Samuel T. Clark" ana
John J. Allen. Alfred l. Nudge. FIRST Assistant
Corporation Counsel represented the city ana
Foster L. Backus the Board Of Aldermen, all
Of whom were made parties in the acton. On
general principles the so-cdled Flynn system,
which is in course of construction. connects with
all the ferries and the Bridge. but its main INES
were from the Broadway and Th.rty-n!nth-st
ferries.
towns. If their plans carry they will eventually
occupy the whole or parts Of Broadway. 'nlon-
st. Marcy-ave. Johnson-ave, Hamburg-ave.,
New-York-ave. and South Elghth-st In the
county towns the projected system is much more
extensive.
Briefly stated the history Of the case IS as fol-
l,ws: The Nassau road made application for IT'S
franchises in the spring Of 1892 in order II include
the routes already applied for by the Kings
countv Electric Railroad and the Coney Island.
Fort Hamilton and Brooklyn Railroad. The fran
chiscs were granted on June 10 Ct the sam" year.
The Brooklyn city Railroad offered to pay SZ''o'o
for about the same franchises. the Aldermen
paid no attention II the Brooklyn Guys apph'A-
ton The Mayor vetoed the grant. Then the
Nassau Company agreed t. pay for the franchises
The grant was about to be given when IN" Union
Street Railroad Company. with William ). cay
nor as It's head. secured an injunction preventing
Mayor Body from signing the resolution oi IN"
Common Council. The franchises were th'n
granted on n percentage basis. without giving the
Tniom-si. company chance t. pat IN a ma.
Through Mr. Adamson. the Union-st. company
brought the present suit T. have the irdnchs'S
set aside.
Judge Smith goes carefully over the Who'll"
ground and saws that he is controlled by the
law as declared by the General Term IN the
case of Adamson against the Union Railroad
Company which is that where the common
Council grants to a railroad company Tor noun
ing a franchise for which the city Is offered
substantial sum of money by another railfoau
COMPANY and where such action Is In bad falth
and as a matter OF favor 10 the company r.
c.iving the grant such action amounts 10
waste of the public funds Of the municipality
and is within the conformation OF the statute
under which this action is brought.
I'm
Committee on Railroads on June g. the Judge
speaks as follows.
There stood the attorneys for the Union street
Railway Company making bids ana increasing ,a
their own bids. and asking 10 De alV"Si ~ s,iu
upon what conditions they were 10 hid, ana sun
he defendant companies made no bid whaiever.
They SIN were not apprehenslNe 81 the result
So, pos r Raiiuay Company he inade acquainted
with the manner of the bidding. he was inior ,
bv the chairman OF the committee that thcy WE
not there ior aI bv wer trustee OF the tax
irist 10 make most profitable 70 those taxpayers
the disposition OF this valuable property They re-
ders might make bids thereon. Iriv@', "1.'', -,
for acts less fragrant. The attorneys for ne mon
Stree, Railway Company requesten 'hat II, u ,hg'r
feet which was durable that they might be noii,
fed thereof. that they might cure fnch detects ana
mitfec and the board. They were Informed by the
in their application. that that was their lookout
Continuing. the Judge says in relation to the
acts Of the Aldermen:
They wanted no BIDS upon the percentage plan
,,lnsa,,ol ,or he dcfeaaan comsnee Aiiorman
Thomas requested that .e be- -4trH 'L 'ii my
10 examine the reports from his own 49,
ana That an adjourn"eni be bad FOR 'nat par,
pose. THIS was refuse. Spcorn's ~er' "al' 10y
several Aldermen ia oilOa4i"i I'D 'A'r' 20,
40, one word was sa'i Dy any ONE IN thrf ne
~ his sarc thirteen. thesc valuable franchises
we're then given - these icien.dat ,yHpa't@s
or Inc brooklyn cry Railroad Company any op
portuuity TO BID therefor.
In closing his opinion Judge Smith says:
In every act Of The committee, or Of ne ,hitern
an apparent determination H. gram 10 me- t a.
fcndani conpanieS tuCs" valuable isH'| To-,
10 give them away their stalcd mort IS 10 rf'f,nl
competition False 80 'l".r Nus' We. ''-' 81 ~.
as Utfle as thcy can get. The cylI'nc" ~ fheir
fraudulent purpose is bo'n direct ana crcninsta',
IL leaves in my mind not the SHADE" 81 "'uD'.
Learned counsel nave enGeavor,t l." oDVr ,ito w
faga by tgPoa glc o. ab ,I hSSe Inc coun hight
GOOD fam Of the Union street Railroad Company.
'Iho amended petition uf tina, company 81 May =
Whereby they sought to obtain thirteen disconnected
minds OF the board 20 the good faith in presenting
the sane. II they had honestly met the amcndrI
petition of June 10 which was gwen TO IN" chairman
% Tho hoard ON June -. and the Railroad Com
lntcc had been frank with this company on J .D
f.ih Of heir suspicious When their action Is
rDusidercI however IN Tho lrHl IN. lh' HNl'if
II The brooklyn city Railroad Company. ~ well ~
Of the Union Street Railway Comp'nS I'M, ",,oi,
stands undofenced The franchises ar" declared
VOID
idw5rd n. Grout OF the PLAINTIFFS counsel.
said I'm commenting upon IN" decision last
night: There Is clearly room now Tor tl' IN
d!ctmcnt by the present Grand jury OF IN" AZ
dcrmrn who were unfaithfu 10 thcir trusts ana
Of "x-Mayor Body. At the i'm" me 'r3ilu
Jurv wanted 10 iudicf them, but were advised
by the District-Attorncy That th'y 'puId mol J
saw the city authorities few minutes ago. ana
officials revolinp ali their permits and prevent
ing them from operating In any manner. Ihey
are mere trcspasscrs. The only thing left Tor
hem TO do is 20 appeal TO a higher court Mr..
Flyun could no doubt apply 10 the present
Board of Aldermen but in that case ne would
have 10 bid with others on tn" percenlase or
receipts he would De willing 10 pay, ana instead