The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1898-12-04
TrNNEL SCHEME DIES HARD
u,rsrpEyr ORR STILL THINKS 1T
INV ne CARRIED THROUGH

~. rand Transit Bonrd's Counsel Say
additional Legislation VIII BE Required
-, Mr.. Or Suggests ways of DodGinE
81. pebt Limit or Failing in That of Hav-
,ar m, Road Built by Private Enterprise.
,.-,s r. pelaneld. Secretary OF the Board
p.ni, Transit Railroad Commissioners,
o,t ooples OF a portion OF the opinion Of
ts.,d NJ Shepard and Albert d. Boardmpn
live nresent difficulties OF the board. to-
: ..,or With an explanation OF the methods Of
tN%,,comiog them proposed by President Alex
..Ier Il. Orr. All agree that special legisla-
w. =, acme form will he necessary to en-
.tIa the board to proceed with itR tunnel
..hsme. and the Rist OF argument Is as to
rbsther such legislation as is desired would
y, constitutional. The counsel is OF the
snirion that there Is no constitutional limi-
,o,ion upon the power OF the county OF New
York to raise money to build the tunnel rail-
,,sd n authorized by appropriate LEGISLATION.
section 10, Article VIII, OF the Constitu-
M which provides that whenever hereafter
~ boundaries OF any city shall become the
..me nc those OF n county. tine power OF that
.,nntv TO become indebted shall cease" is
MA not to apply to New York county. because
Ito h0UnusIltS Nol0 oiASetS VH
,hoss Of New York city Mt the time OF the adop-
han Of the Constitution. and had been for
.ome time prior thereto. and also because they
"a not now coincident with the boundaries
~ The Greater New York city. 1t IL alleged
,hst this constitutional provision was made
.olaly IN cover the admission OF Flatlands. the
I,., remaining town OF Kings county. into the
chy OF brooklyn. and the proposed amend
ment making the provision broader In its
covering mower is also cited.
The opinion also states that the annexation
of,be remainder OF West Chester. East Chester.
and Pelham BY the law Of 1895 did not create
identify in the boundaries Of the COUNT and
CITY. but extended both. already identical, and
declares that it may be open TO argument
whether or not the constitutional Limitation
did not become imperative when the Greater
Nav York was created and county and city
ceased to be identical.
I'm our opinion" concludes this portion Of
the opinion. the provision that whenever the
boundaries OF q city shall become the same
as the county boundaries the power of, the
county 10 become indebted shall cease is not
applicable to the county of New York. In
our opinion. the constitutional power Of New
York county to incur debt will, so far as he-e:
, after permitted by legislation. continue until
tie pending constitutional amendment to
which we have refs rred or some other IKE
Constitutional amendment shall be adopted.
"lfit be complained that the result would. in
substance, be to make che debt limit Of the
count Of New noTn ~ per bot ee she f rnnesfiS Ti 50
' Is to be Interpreted, as meaning what II says.
In the case of the East River savings ~1nstitu-
cided that the city Of Brookiyn. which then
constituted ali of the county OF Kings EXCEPT
four towns, and contained an enormous nre1
ponderance lin the proportion, perhaps. OF 40
L. II OF the population. wealth and assessed
Mutation o: the county. could incur debt TO
the limit OF - per cent. OF its value. and that
In addition the county OF Kings could incur
dept to the limit Of its valuation. although its
valuation included the Brooklyn valuation. 50
s saS t sSWn a would p mot S Se igelG %is5rict The SeG Sou Gt
Of Appeals held that the Constitution was TO be
Interpreted according TO its text,
President Orr's explanation is in part as
AT The meeting on Thursday the RAND
Transit Board took under careful considera:
the enlarged city Of New York to borrow a
sufficient sum Of money TO construct the rapid
transit railroad in the manner REQUIRED by the
eohterenee the Commissioners reached the
unanimous conclusion that unless the lowers
q the board sneGld be enlarged by further
ledslation IL would be impossible now. or for
many years TO cone. to proceed with the con-
%stPlction of the railroad,
Two courses ONLY appear to be omen to the
board IN tho prosecution of the duty with
which a it A charged. These arc q request for
fEiSfhtlON NldhtlEf tHt Tuplu tTduSlL Tpdu lu
'a-se; exclusively or the county OF New York
lDoroughs OF Manhattan and the Bronx. and,
co7rcsponding!y, making the debt incurred
for It's construction a charge exclusively upon
the county: and a raluest for legislation en-.
aiding the Rapid Transit Board. in it, discre-
ton. ard Il. tor any, reason. construction by
the county Is found to be impracticable. to
frame aud sell to private capitalists n charter
for the road. Authority to adopt both of these
discretion OF. the board. might, well be en-.
bTced IN a single scheme Of Legislation. Blu
foy purp 'Ses u exclamation they may be treat
Cd a. wholly distinct prot sitions.
There has undoubtedly been n popular i'm
PRESTON that there was L. constitutional limi-
ttatioli urol the power OF the, county OF New
YORK to incur a separate Indebtedness in ai-
ditlon to the Indebtedness Of the city. But
!, counsel has advised the board TO the con
tr9Ey, 1t would appeHr. therefore. that the
only resource. which Is available, or which will
be ~ayallab!e for many years to come. is the
borrowing, capacity Of the county Of New York.
The legislature could repeal the provision of
the, Greater New York charter making the
rapid transit road an asset OF and q charge
llton The greater city, and restore the rond to
The position originally intended for 1t and ap-
proved by popular vote. 2f being an asset OF
sh1 a charge solely upon the boruughs of Man.
hatlan and the Bronx. The %boroughs of Man.
county, and New York county could issue its
bonds 70 provide the cost Of the road. The
c SoHsS9. e esSs Il i" all TIN ds ebbRae CT {h 81 fo Ssw i city
o. New York existing on Dec. 81. 1897 and
slI existing. be reckoned as county debts.
sHH' - "oAulHcu W Dt buluCltuJ 10 ptTIllI TIC
occurring Of a.debt sufficient to build the rapid
transit road.
1T may be said that this proposal implies
eeSaslon OF the constitutional limitation. But
lhe constitution permits a county whose boun-
uhIles aid not become the same as those Of O
Guy after Dec. 81. 1884. to incur o debt which
h,hai not be counted against the 10 per cent.
limitation OF a city which shall include the
county. For the county to avail itself Of q privi-
ieRe permitted by the Constitution is not an
evasion. The danger. no. doubt. lies In the
precedent, But the people OF the.State will
PROBABLY adopt In November next a constitu-
uolal amendment prohibiting q county In
SHded within a city from thereafter mourning
dept That, would effectually prevent new
ueot-lncuTrinE by New York county for all
VINE TO come. To permit u single debt Of New
asa precedent.
There is reason for relieving the boroughs
h hrooHiyn. Queens and Richmond OF this
ou9hhen' Just as there !s reason why the hor;
ouRhs ~ Manhattan and the Bronx should
ssHpiuaINely own the corresponding asset. Mu-
uuts,ial construction was authorized by POD.
MHa' n,ote OF the horoughs OF Manhattan and
ny ,ruhS' There has never been popular
SSseht 10 such mnnlcinal construction by the
~ Wa"Nihs OF brooklyn. Queens. or Richmond.
s Ws r'leNe that it would never receive such
~ hi!l 10 give the Rapid Transit Board the
nnMer 10 create and sell a franchise would be
eShhmIalatiNtly simple. Provisions Of that
in.r"et,r are already In the Rapid Transit
nv me new bill would need simply 10 per-