The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-04-11
Ought tho City to Run q Theatre 2

The Constitution of this State provides
that no city shall be allowed to incur any
Indebtedness except for city purposes, and
in the rapid transit case Mr.. Justice
INGRAHAM of the Appellate Division, in
his very able dissenting opinion, pointed
out the danger of extending the meaning
of the words lefty purposes" He said:
"If the public character OF tho business or use to
which the property Is put controls. l can SEQ no
reason why the city of New York should not he com.
PEELED to erect hotels TO DO used for the
ton OF guests, theatres to be used for the amusement
OF its citizens, elevators to be used by the railroads
for loading grain from their cars. stage or cab ines
for the carrying OF passengers. or for almost any
use or purpose which is required for the convenience
or amusement OF the people"
The sound sense of this apprehension on
the part of Mr.. Justice INGRAHAM has just
been shown by the introduction of a bill in
the Legislature, which provides, practi.
cally, for the purchase of a theatre or place
of amusement by the city of New York.
We refer to the bill which provides for the
purchase by the city of New York of tho
Madison Square Garden and the issue of
city bonds to pay for the investment. 1t is
true that the proposition is coupled with
NlS pioIooNo VI IhiN VI Az = w
ture to rooms for some of the city depart
ments. But that is not the real design /;
for, rs we all know, most of the city de-
partmenta are located downtown in the
vicinity of the City Hall Park, and there
can be no need Of n large expenditure Of
money for rooms uptown.
The bill provides that the Garden can be
leased or rented by the city authorities for
entertainments, and the real intention Is,
of course, to have the city go into the bust
ness of running the Garden for various
forms Of entertainment.
The act if passed will clearly be uncon-
stitutional, for we bclievu that even our
courts would hesitate to comm end the issue
of city bonds for amusemerss.
Moreover, frora n business standpoint, n
practical objection to the proposition is
that tho Garden has never paid any divi-
dends TO it's present stockholders, and has
never been able to pay a fair profit OF the
amount invested, and we understand that,
If sold to the city, the Garden would not be
sold at Il low price. If the city goes into
the amusement business, it will have to
take its pay often in n share of the box re-
ceipts or gate money, and the municipal
authorities will be placed in the somewhat
undigniled position of sharing in the re-
ceipts of the Arion ball or Barnun's Circus
or the Dog Show.
OF course, the time may come when mu-
nicipal ownership of every kind of property
shall have destroyed all individual energy,
and when the principles of the Commune
shall become triumphant. In that day it
may be that the city will run the cable
cars and be engaged in the hanson cab
business; that it will supply the gas and
electric light, and enter into the express
and parcel business, and own the local tele-
graphs and telephones, and. possibly, run
hotels; and then it may seem well to our
courts that the city should also own all the
theatres and all the music halls. But to-
day the proposition is a little too strong
m n little too extreme even for the advo-
Gates of modern socialism.