The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-11-14
TAXPAYERSOPPOSEDT TO 1T.
UNDE UND RAPID Transit
FINDS FEW PRIENDS.

Hs pEepnces the Credit or the city By Threat
enisE to Exceed the Constitutional Debt
Limit fer the Constructiep or q Road That
Will ne Fsun ut = Loss 10 ne Met BY Tasatiou.
One week from tomorrow. on Nov. %, the
Appellate Division Of tho Supreme Court will
hear tho motion Of counsel for the Board OF
Rapid Transit Railroad Commissioned to con.
nrm tho favorlnE report OF the special com.
mission appointed to approve or disapprovo OF
the new plan of rapid transit for the city Of Now
York, recommended by the Rapid Transit Com
missioners. Stripped ofleRal form, tho question
% be determined by tho court is:
Shall q rapid transit railway or railways, for
the conveyance and transportation Of persons
and property. according to tho plans determined
~ the Commissioners. DO constructed and op-
0ratedi
Tho Justices of tho Appellate Division Of the
supreme Court are: Charles II. Van Brunt, pro-
siding Justice; George @. Barrett, William Rum.
sey. Pardon g. Williams. Edward Patterson,
Morgan J. o'Brien. and George I. Ineraham.
OF these seven, ivo will hear tho motion. To
asaist them in arriving at their decision. tho
Justices will have the report Of the Rapid Tran
cit Commissioner. which. in 2O5 printed pages,
gives all the details Of the proposed
scheme. the route to DO followed. and tho
supposititious cost Of construction. This plan
was adopted by the votes OF six of the Rapid
Transit Commissioners, on Jan. Ia and Feb. 4,
1897. Those who voted for the proposed plan
were Alexander e. Orr, President Of the board;
John Clanin, John II. stsrin. George I. Rives'
Woodbury. Langdon and Charles stewart Smith
The votes of Mayor Strong and Comptroller
Fitch, e~x.oHicio members of the commission.
were not recorded in favor of the plan.
To further facilitate them in arriving at A
decision, the court will also have the report Of
tho special commission, which the court created.
upon application Of the Rapid Transit Commits.
sioners, to examine the plans for the propo,ed
railway and the estimated cost Of construction.
and then determine whether. in the opinion Of
these special Commissioners, the road ought
to DO built according to the plans recon-.
mendeu by the Rapid Transit Commissioners
Tho special Commissioner vere. Arthur n
Williams, John Sabine Smith. and George w.
1ounE: ny unanimous VOC these special
an Nor q Eor . ,aI o s,s.s "n'c enc orea.oo tnem
Of counsel retained by the RAND Tran,it Com.
mis'ioners to argue in favor of the proposition
and OF counsel retained by certain taxpayers to
argue against the proposition.
So far, the only persons on record as ~favoring
the scheme are the members of the Rapid Tran.
nit and Special commissions and tbe;r ,.vror,
ING Ineinoors OF the common council and OF tho
Of af the oG Twon.1.sh, rhG an ,Se T stsoes commissions ".ns.
some Of the New Yort nonora hsvo dooIorad IN
favor Of it. Other New YORK nowsu ueu.ss' and
Almost the entire nresa os tbosa ,.o.
rrans ~n 80 v soo-
the boroughs of Brooklyn, Queens, and
Richmond, under the government q, tbo
Greater New York. are opposed. Certain tax.
payers of the present city Of New York having
y ono an assessed Vhiuatioh OF
ne@riy ~o,ooo'ovo nave aireaoS put themselves
on record as against the proposition. In the
over the city one may meet and talk with scores
heartily favor Increased ranid trans,t Faculties
a " :. in.,easou rapia Transit iacllties,
scheme recommended BY tho Rapid Transit
commissioners A reporter Of THE SUN, in at
te%Ptii IL Es TO- find out ut t the drift Of public senti;
200 such taxpayers yesterday afternoon and
none who favored the scheme. It is inferred that
greater humber Of taxpayers OF the same 1su mind.
In the plan recommended by the Rapid Transit
Appellate Division Of tho SUPREME aS@ Court our To 70
compel the oity to build. two routes are sug.
F Fos,s Is: f Tss d 5snass i gne S so se%msnes a. T as n alsss
the intersection Of Broadway with Park row.
thence under Park row and Centre street to a
street with new Elm street, as proposed; thence
under new Elm street, as proposed. to Lafayette
place: thence under Lafayette place to Eighth
street; thence across and under Eighth street
and under private property between Eighth and
Ninth streets to Fourth avenue: thence under
Fourth avenue amt Park avenue to Forty.sec.
ond street; thence westerly under Forty.second
street, taking, for the purposes of the curve, IL
necessary or convenient, private property at
the southwest corner of Forty.second street and
Park avenue. to Broadway; thence under Broad
way. to Fifty-ninth street; thence under tho
Boulevard to q point at or near l24th street;
thence by viaduct along and over the Boulevard
TO a point at or near 134th street; thence under
undorEieventh avenue. south OF i9oth street and
distant therefrom not less than 1000 and not
moro than 1900 feet; thence under, or over.
as may be most convenient, privats property to
near HILLSIDE street; thence over Ellwood street
to Kingsbridge avenue. or Broadway. as now
proposed, to Riverdale avenue. and thence east
erly over Riyerdale avenue to q point within
800 feet of the present KingsbridRe station Of
the New York and Putnam Railroad.
The other route DIVORCES from the FIRST route
at the Boulevard, between q line parallel to and
100 feet north Of 1o3d street and q line parallel
to and 100 feet south of 103d street, and runs
THENCE under private property to a point under
10th street; thence under 104th street to and
across Central Park West: thence under Cen