New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-02-01


pany to supply improved rapid-trsnsit facilities
the city of New-York
WEST-sT. AND FERRY LINE
In further compliance with your suggestions.
have made the West-st. and ferry line separate
and distinct rou.e thus limiting the legal questions
raised by your Board exclusively to the City Hall
ana crosstown he. In your letter you state: The
Board thinks IT il forbidden by the statute under
which IT is constituted to authorize the construction
south OF Thirty -thrd-s' You add, Personally. I
aHS ths Limitation upon the power Of the BoaTd
subject am advised by eminent counsel that the
authorize this connecting line across Broadway,
Suo; on the contrary plainly empowers II 10 DO SO
defines your powers with respect 10 the existing
eevated railways in this city, and as am advised,
,horizing correcting route to cross broadway.
,bneed broadway Is not mentioned or referred 10 IN
0y Section 80 to your Board to FIX and determine
Il. G, the Manhattan Railway Company may con-
,sSr win other team railways or the stations
tracks and operate rs railway to any terminal or
terminals within said city" II Is TO make such
sse9.neSting line S asked for, between The West
Bridge terminals, and between its Thrd-aye. line at
the City Hall and It's west lines and the steam
C to Bdw eyen asq 4eterss To o s
OF the act. which dea with roads to be built by
has no reference to connecting crosstown lines to
be built by an existing elevated railway company.
section contains this .angusge:
Nothing in this act shall authorize the CONSTITUTE
Thirty-;hrd-st nor in Madison-ave." This seems
to be a prohibition TO construct road along these
deed EXPRESS ouhcr;y appears to be given S in the
Way 10 Sc butt under pbIs act across "a anv OF the
streets or avenues excepted in this any point
At which, in rs discretion. the Board Of Rapid
Transit Commissioners may deem Necessary" Even
II TIE exceptions in Section as % streets have any
under section % the anguaee just quoted would
seem 10 settle the point that there is no prohibition
power 10 40 So even as 20 the executed streets.
a @ Scontr2Iy 70 rs term and which nuihes ono
pIlenary and if any doubt exists as 20 Your at-
tthority think you should so,ye that doubt in
this question at such length because The public
a. s Is much cPqserned in the building
c a 'he ss Vw jPrSo nall held by you UPON the
ana Will ultimately prevail.
BOULEVARD AND FORT GEORGE.
In your letter YOU refer at considerable length
10 the Boulevard and Fort George route outlined
in my letter OF January 90 and you express unof-
cially the opinion that this route is INADEQUATE
because II contemplates line terminating at Fort
George, instead OF being extended as far north as
whether any benefit which f be 'nS 6odu GOuHl;
confer on he public woud o e eny5f ,Ss ms
which T the building Of an elevated road would IN
hict upon the city by the defacemon Of the Boule-
yard ana the. great damage to the properly upon
the route You add that. IN the opinion of The
tained so far as the transportation problem is con-
teress and the private rg6ts of ,n 3f 5ueo Nv
TIE adoption Of some other route; but YOU state
that the matter is- entirely open. and that "the
Board will rot express even an Informal opinion
,,CMGtr d ms route until i shall hava had
Th w haTI DIn iGd %G 9g1nst IT, osro
IS lar as possible. with our suggestion and there
lore an In ne application herewith submitted. has
for a line to One-hundred -and-sixty-ninth- and
thence to Kingsbridee. in accordance with the
In view of the width of the Boulevard the fact
thal IL is already occupied 10 considerable extent
bulk thereon Will be in the centre Of the stree
light in lis construction and the cars thereon
probably operated by electricity II Is believed that
Boulevard, nor any essential injury 70 the abutting
SW 6 TBS route n seems to 9e the most drc
any doubt as 70 the Troprety Of granting his fran
thereto II. after full presentation and discussion
Is rot desirable to adopt :he boulevard this
from You Of such aIternative route as will avoid
the difficulties attending the one now proposed.
and satsfac6n the formal assurance that Your
Board is willing 20 grant such reasonable appl-
and convenience Of the travelling public: and
viii avail myself of this opportunity TO assure YOU.
presents MS application with an earnest desire 10
thor,y and financial ability to increase the comfort
of the travelling public and furnish the most speedy
and practical solution Of the rapid transit problem
in the city OF New-Nork
] have the honor 10 remain truly y0urs
GEORGE J. GOULD.
President Manhattan Railway Company.
The New-Yo-is and Ncw-Jersey Bridge Company
is protesting against any encroachmen. upon the
ground allotted to It for the construction Of an
approach 70 the proposed bridge.
1T seems TO be forgotten" said Charles H. Swan
the secretary, yesterday. that occupy a Ger
tain part Of the wharf ground west OF West-st for
our approach. We run five feet Of Wes.-st.
age. Now, as far as ! understand. II the elevated
railroad VIII run alonE WeSt-s-. proper. then there
can be no interference with our bridge
But ask that the RaTii Transit Board
should not III Is consideration Of that question
overlook that the approach Of our bridge is TO he
bull; for the purposes Of commerce. and that they
should protect rs from possible OachmenL
or our ground by the Manhattan Company. We
shohd also know, just carly ms possible. pre-
cisely what arrangements will be made IN respect
OF the plans, and how far are likely ne
afflicted In the construction Of the elevated rail-
road"
II is understood that George H. Pegram chief
engineer OF tho Union Pacific Railroad. who
signed recently 70 take the place OF consulting
ciuccr Of the Manhattan Railway Company. OF THIS
Ciy. Will enter upon his new duties without delay.
NJ. Pegram is his way East from Omaha.
There we're ruTOT5 IN certain quarters that the
new engineer might supersedc General Manager
Flansioli. but this denied by director OF the
Manhattan Company