New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-11-28
RIGHTS AND WRONGS on THE BRIDGE.

The latest plan for a bicycle road across the
East River Bridge has some good features, but
also some bad ones That road for wheelmen
should he provided Is unQuestionable. The re-
linquishment Of the roads they have hitherto
used in common with other vehicles TO the troll
ley lines will practically exclude them from the
Bridge To the proposition to make new roads
for them above the railroads there is the serious
and probably insuperable objection that it
would require the construction Of q long In
clined plane at each end, that at the Manhattan
end reaching across the City Hall Park TO
Broadway, or down Park Row to Mast.
That such a thing would be permitted is not
supposable. The present plan is to surrender
the pedestrians path, in the centre Of the
Bridge, to the wheelmen, and provide new
footwalks above the railroads. That would
give wheelmen access to the Bridge at the pres
cnt street level, and would give to pedestrians
paths really superior. at least as far as sight
seeing is concerned. to the one they are now
using.
The chief objection to the plan from the
wheelmen's point of view Is that only one road
way and that not wide one, would be pro-
vided for those going in both directions, and 1t
would have, where the steps now are, some
each tower If all riders were orderly, and
scrupulously observant OF the rules OF the road,
such a path might serve quite well But with
the customary prevalence of "scorchers" and
careless riders and the great temptation TO
fast riding offered by the smooth track and
long down grades, there would be serious dan
ger of accidents. Perhaps some danger might
be averted by dividing the path into two longl.
Ilxr hnt hot
each so narrow as to cause other dangers no
less than those avoided
From the point of view Of pedestrlans-who
still form s. considerable proportion Of the pub
lie and of the patronage of the Bridge-the
chief objection Is that access to the new foot
paths would be most difficult People who
now 90 to the Bridge railroad have to climb two
long fights of stairs. To require pedestrians
to climb not only these but a third fight
would be a gross imposition. 1t would abso-
lutely exclude from the promenade thousands
| who now use it with pleasure and profit but
who are physically incapable OF climbing sew
| enty or eighty steps at each end. 1t would be
| all the more intolerable that they were thus
treated In order that the trolley companies
might take in their patrons Mt the street level,
| and thus have the greatest possible facilities
| at the least possible expense 1t would be bad
| enough to compel pedestrians to risk limb and
| life ir lodging across gridiron of trolley-car
| tracks 1t would be simply scandalcus to say
that, for the sake Of swelling the dividends of
some favored corporations every one who
wishes TO walk across the Bridge shall be COM
| PEELED to climb upstairs to the height Of the
fourth or fifth story of a modern business build
| ing.
The transportation companies may regard all
who do not pay five cents each to them for the
privilege Of traversing public highway as
very inferior beings, who have no rights which
they are bound to respect They might like to