New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-05-20
HILBERT BROS. 4 co. -
a Costumes md OutAts ~
~ FOR EVERY KIND OF SPORT.
~ SO w. 23d st. ~
Opposite Old store. v
TUE CITY AND THE FRANCHISES
HEARING BEFORE THE coNTFoLNE
poNEp-CHARLEs II. BUTLER
r->-r,ON TO NEW POINTS.

r,,ropr THE CONTROLLER POSI-
ro>-rr cuARLEs H. BUTLER CALLS
ATTENTION TO NEW POINTS.
Nn,hng took place yesterday IN tn' 49,, an the
peasng the popular desire loi IL, interesting 10
a.., ord citizens involving the CIT! is"' ~
,,,ro possession OF the Sixth-ave anu i'e h,oh
surface roads under the Original az oh,a,ned
,ho franchises of the corporations We" .hioh
Tha Ne,ropolitan Street Railway Oohip""', s.oa
a ,oased the railroads In question, seems 70 80
,o,rv into these matters. Inc hea''e
'tun. pouroad Committee have peeh apd"
49,, ora yesterday the company was apie 10 So
oes .rotber hearing which the Controher was q,
a. make The Metropolitan Compah! -
d,scontinuing the inquiry YESTERDAY VI, '.o ,ha
that the questions at Issue were a"e"N'
courts. 90 ,,o- attorney for
some uasS 7ro offered 100000 apiece for the
49, ..urood franchises in addition to the sum 'ne'i
rars could lawfully demand, asked Coh'i ono'
Evtch 70 grant him hearing IN the maj. o.
sau,rouor nromntly acceded and fixed the time iof
Yesterday afternoon. at the same time 'ioi ''9 Wv
Metropolitan Company OF his Intention. ~,
The company, through its lawyers James ~ o..
,o ora El,bu Root responded that they hau 'e
N, o,ioo NJ the proposed hearing when was "
..,no ou. the reasons for the purchase by lhe cry
20 ,Sa roads under the option OF July 80 1901. III q
80 n the Controller Messrs. carter anu i'o''
wrote: IT, r,u,,,n,ied
I'VE are fully aware OF the EFFORTS IN m"'pI.
forms of which this is one, or the iN',u -, 1850
ro'"s crorv ~ interpose obstacles In the way
., ,ha contemplated improvement OF these TWO ran
o,as he the introduction by the metropolitan Co'
many OF the new motive power ana larger eqp'
Inasmuch as the Metropolitan Company io' -,
we are Of counsel. has interests Oh It's Wv" - o
matter we cannot assume 10 represent pei'io 'O
any mart Of the public and the only question: tne'o
ere which II would be proper for us TO discuss oe
CO., ,,,, would he the legal right OF the city OF New
york tn effect such purchase. That legal quesuo"
has already through the same agencies which 'ia'e
sought this hearing before you. been Drousn. uei.'
the courts and has been submitted lot oe'is'ol
Under such circumstances there would be an op''-
ous impropriety IN arguing before you this question
| of law We should suppose. however that any s's
ces,,on that the city OF NewYoTk had authority 10
| purchase these two railroads, or either OF them'
which IL could do for the purposes only either Vi ie
sale at profit. OF engaging directly IN inc opera
zion OF a stree. railroad would seem to be quite IN
odmssible We have already advised our client that
M such right on the part the city exists and We
believe that such will be the decision OF the courts
When the time for the hearing arrived yesterday
the Controller caused this letter TO be read ana al
dressing Mr. Butler. said: This letter informs me
that the questions which you desire TO discuss here
today have already been taken by you 10 the gu
9ecison- Since receiving the letter have made in
| Gujres and have been Informed that the matter Is
nov before one OF the Justices OF the Supreme Court
| When I acceded to your wish 10 present argument
here | was not aware OF this state Of facts. 1t
would be manfestly improper for me to listen 10
| argument upon or assume to act In any matter
which Is presently held under AMUSEMENT by Jus-
tice of the Supreme Court. Whenever the decision
has been reached shall listen willingly 10 you, or
any other citizen who has any views as to the duty
| NJ the Controller in any public matter
Mr. butler replied that he desired to raise ques-
| lions other than those which had been submitted
Ia but persistence on his part IN de-
| handing that the hearing should go on might be
| construed by some as dlsreSpect TO the Supreme
| Court which he held In high veneration he would
| withdraw his request for the hearing for the
Mr. Butler said afterward that he desired to make
| the point that the city might lose its surrender
rights II II permitted the companies 10 spend a large
sum Of money at the present time In changing the
the argument before Judge Beach James g. Carter,
the senior counsel for the railroad companies had
| openly stated that the citys rights under the
render clause expressly limited 10 the reacqu-
sit!on OF horse railroad. Mr.. Butler added that.
while he did not admit Mr.. Carriers proposition. the
| CITY officers should take notice that the railroad
! companies had made this declaration, and that II,
after they had spent several millions for the change
of power, the city attempted to enforce its rights
| 10 compel the surrender. they would undoubtedly
therefore risk Of that nature should be assumed
Another point Mr.. Butler referred 10 was that IL
the Controller considered that the city had
parent rights. II his duty to act: that the point
was not whether these rights were positive and de-
| tcr,nined but II there were any grounds wha
which justified the officers In thinking that there
| might be a claim 1t their duty TO present IL 10
the courts and not take any risks especially as Mr..
! Braker was ready indemnify the city against all
loss. damage and expenses. II action were taken.