New-York tribune., 1896-05-25
POPULAR OBSERVATIONS.
e-.,,, HOPE FOR RAPID TRANSIT.

Sir: A little careful consider ition OIL .'o ANAp
Transit act; under which the decision OF inc Ap
,,a,o DIvIsion of the Supreme Court has just
heen rendered. seems suggest the remeuS i''
which the people are anxously looking just a. p''
ent The writer would not have the assurance ~
,,,,mate IN anv way that he could read remedy
out of A lay when the eminent counsei Oh tie i'ap'
Transit Commissioners had failed 10 find H. But
as the remedy here to be suggested seems 10 oe
founded on downright hard work IN se''"s ."o
consent OF property owners. rather thah OH pun
question Of law. II Is made with no other OBJECT
than calling attention to the fact that rapiu 'as'
can only he defeated. now, In spite or thls
adverse decision of the courts. by the se.nshness
and t-sghtedness of the property owners along
tho proposed route
This may be a broad assertion. but consideration
of the several provisions OF the Rapid Transit act
will the writer believes, justify the statement. In
the first place 1t is TO be borne In mind that the
present proceeding in the Supreme Court was
merely an expedient. to accomplish one purpose
only: that Is to have the Court declare that the
road should be built in spite OF the failure OF the
Commissioners 10 secure the consents OF the re-
qu red number of property owners along the pro-
posed route. BY the plain reading OF the statute
the Supreme Court Commissioners were 10 he ap-
ponted for that purpose exclusively. and the gen.
era powers OF The Rapid Transit Commissioners
provded for IN the act were not In any way quail
fed by that proceeding.
4 consideration of tho several provisions OF the
act will make this plain. Sections !, ana .
he composed for the oaths OF the Commissioners
and for the organization OF the Board Section
IS entitled Board detcrm ne necessity or rail-
ways. plan Of construction and routes prov'so as
10 consents. parks and certain streets eNcepteu'
The part of the latter section bearing on the ques-
tlon now under consideration reads as follows:
The said Board upon It's own motion may pro-
coed. from time to time. 10 CONSIDER ana oetering
Of The city in which It is appointed nat a. rap,d Ind
IRAN inn Of
established therein, and upon request in writing OF
the s9I Hoard snail proceed forthwith to consider
and determine the same questions and In each case
invesfiration as may be deemed necessary in the
the said Board shall deerm ne that rapid s rans,t
railway always IN addition to any ny 5 5rfady pub
lie and such city. it shall then proceed 10 deter,,
mine and establish the route or routes t9ereol
plan shall show the general mode OF operatiSSn ana
The Board shah be necessary for the purpose OF
deiermin ng and establishing such route or routes
t. line. may locate the route or routes OF such
railway railways over. under; upon. through & ana
across any street. avenues and lands within such
city provided that the consent OF the own
o. oneha value o. the propeTy pNunSsG Ssv0r or
control of that portion of the street or highway
P'h such ra!iway or always be hrst obtained in
| the consent o. such property owners canno'
missioners appointed by the General Term Of the
supreme Court IN the district or rne rIt
nieres'ed and confirmed by IN, Court. that such
railway or railways ought to be constructed or
operated be taken in lieu Of the consent OF such
property owners.
The remainder Of the section specifies what streets
and parks shall not be occupied Tor the purposes
Of such railroad.
Section provides for procuring the consent OF the
local authorities tn. plans and routes determined
upon by the Rapid Transit Commissioners proper
by submitting them 20 the Board OF Aldermen and
when approved by the Aldermen and the Mayor
tn. section continues:
Upon the adoption Of such resolution by ma
jor.iy vote ~ al the members OF the common
sIch resolution. then by two-thirds vote Of all
and conclusions shall be deemed TO have been
sh&i be deemed the consent of the local authorizes
~ such city. Upon Obtaining he approva!
and consent of the local authorities as above pro-
y.dcl. tho said Board OF Rapid Transit Com,
@onscnt % local Authorities shall have been
refused. take the necessary steps TO Obtain. II pos
along 'Ae Inc of ihe SAID route or routes. =,
II such consents of properly owners cannot be OBJ
aunlra,lon 10 the General Term ~ the Supreme
cnnrt m IN. judicial istrc, in which said railway
Commissioners 10 determine and report after due
hearing whether such ragway ought 10 be con-
strucii and operated
Tho remainder Of this section apples only 20 the
details o., making this application. how II Is 10 be
advertised. etc.
Enough has been quoted Of the law to show that
I
pcii.nt 90 get simply one difficulty. namely the
lack Of ihc consent of the property owners along
the proposed route. The Commissioners may now
proceed ie novo from the point whore the sppl!-
cation wAl made 20 the Court and by getting ths
required consents OF the property owners OF one
half the value OF th- property a.ong tho proposed
Inc proceed as II no application had been made 20
ono more pon nceds 20 be touched ,- upon TIA,
it, prcsent decision. bcctus, all probability the
property owners VINO fought the matter this time
taken The reading Of the statute providing for
the original proceedings by the Rapid Transit Com
be seen from the portions quoted the law gives the
nrf w,ar GnIcreuon n IN 5s ns ma
mission Is made up OK the Mayor and the Con-
Now it = proposition OF law. which scarcely needs
The citation OF any authority to support. that where
Discretionary power Is given TO public official
10 do or not - do a certain act. and a. to the
powerlcss TO interfere with the exercise OF that dis
crrtton, unless there - gross abuse OF the dis
Even II his fact did net entirely prevent the
courts from interfering with the Commissioners It
me mcasiTre wbrh ~ foy the wefsrn iU oS ;h
would allow an appeal to the Court OF Appeals
where the right to such an appea. seems doubt
fu. Tho people would then have the satisfaction
ny N the State had declared agans, the project
and derive what comfort they could from that fact.
The writer does not know how great the efforts
number OF property holders; but It seems 10 him
that II the newspapers should warmly advocate the
matter by publishing the names OF those who re-
fused their consents, and honest effort were
made to Induce those who have heretofore objected
! to the error OF their ways and 10 realize what
/ rreparab.e damage they were doing to the city,
enough might be induced to consent make the
Supreme Court proceeding unnecessary.
| II may be possible that the Commissioners were
uiled into inactivity In the first instance In their
efforts to secure the consents Of property owners
by the baef that In view OF the expressed will OF
fhe people at the balot-boX and the general ardent
desire OF the public for means of rapid transit
! the Supreme Court proceedings would be merely
formal and that the objections OF a few selfish
property owners would not be allowed TO defeat the