The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1898-02-01

the request contained in your letter of Jan. 26.
1898, have the honor 70 transmit, herewith q
iormsl a2pnSati9n Tor inc connections, exten'
sired by this company. In preparing this appli-
cation / have cndeavored to meet every sug-
IN every particular with your requests, even
though ! am advised by counsel that the Rapid
t tt1as IN act q t SGes ne" a .S%SlhisetmiP,at ana q r tSat sS oc de q
course was not warranted by precedent. Your
board, however. has Indicated its preference.
as 1t is possible to do at this time ~ the routes,
q, the form OF structure proposed to DO built,
d ts. res a aafh,,U aime: Within S Which Stf tse paoposss
structures will be completed. and (5( such
other and additional facts as nppear to this
The application l transmit herewith presents
a broad and comprehensive plan to improve tho
5aRia a1sn 4 sh aoeiii'i be- co OF ta.s dfis :. a IN %o1 my
and not as an aggregation of separate applica.
tions which sustain little or no relation to each
sideration, your board still adheres to the opin.
ion Expresses In your letter, that Separate
cSises a apPi faeiiisiss iS Should siih be eaq presented itan /
will endeavor to meet your views in every pos
sible manner consistent with the general plan
pPS RspT Tspid G transit 1his i%fS sGiIisiss 70 sSep City iS Of
New York.
Mr.. Goul discusses the right of the board to
grant the privilege Of crossing Broadway. for
the proposed crosstown line..and declares that
he believes tho right exists under the statute.
He says:
To deny this power would seem to put q con.
struc:ion on the ACT. contrary to its terms and
ton 80. Your power is pienary, and II any
should solve that doubt in favor OF the public
interest. have referred to this question at
such length because the public accommodation is
much concerned in the building OF this connect
ing line. and because l am convinced that the
view personally held by you.upon the merits. as
stated in your letter, is the correct one and will
ultimately prevail.
TO the Boulevard and Fort George route. out
lined in my letter Of Jan. 20. and you express,
cquate. because y .o~ontemplatcs a line ter
minating AT Fort George, instead of being ex-
tended as far north as kingsbridge. You also
ht which the extension might confer upon the
public would outweigh the injury which the
the city by the DETACHMENT OF he boulevard and
the great damage 30 the property upon the
route" You add that in the, opinion Of the
board, equally favorable results could be oo-
concerned. and with far less injury TO the pub
uals, by the adoption OF some other route; but
you state that the matter is entirely open and
that the board will not express even an in.
formal opinion concerning this route until IL
shall have had n further opportunity To con
slider such arguments as may be made both for
This company desires to comply in every re-
specs, AS far as possible. with your suggestions,
and therefore, in the application herewith sub
mitted, has modified the route to Fort George,
and now applied for a line to Tooth street and
thence 10 kingsbridge. in accordance with the
expressed wishes Of your board.
IN view of the width of the Boulevard. the
fact that 1t 10 already occupied to q cOnsidera-
BILE extent by surface lines. that the elevated
structure TO be built thereon will be in the
centre of the street, Will be built of steel. and
win be ornamental ana light in its construction
and the card thereon probably operated by
electricity. II y believed that IL will not cause
any essential defacenent OF the boulevard
nor any essential injury To the abutting
owners. The route seems TO be the most direct
the north. and this company desires, 1.-THE
board has any doubt as TO the propriety OF
granting this franchise, TO DO fully and publicly
tAtion and discussion % theso fActA. yoa are