New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-03-12

siding
sey and Patterson concurring. Justice Ingidhaih
d,ssents on The ground that the report oil the
courts commission. approving the plans Oh 'He
Rsnii Transit Commission. ought not TO nave peeii
approved al all
THE COURTS DECISION.
The prevailing opinion reads as follows
=, &c cloirned upon the part of the Board Of Rapid
Transit Commissioners that the, o'i LA ~
power 10 require hat certain c0mul'iH conSeut 70
~ 'ronstruction Of the road by conhFmhs '"o
r rc1 ~ the supreme Court Commissioners. 80
GO 10 confirm that report for any reasons wm H
s,sh seem 70 II to Justify such action II Is 1,i
mai certain things shall be done which, )" oo ~
Judgment necessary preTegsbsS i 10 5 Of
precisely this power by n Go ben consents we're
sns {or the Construction Of the Broadway sur
face railroad below Fifteent n-st,' " vi sum an
nualv Exceeding in amount the inertSI "a, 49, r
rae a. iInss lie then claimed value Of the iran
~ and tho imposition upon the coinPan! .,
me 9Dhgattoh, h ~ sane free from snow and ice
PIor 70 the confirmation OF the report OF It's CGIn
missoners in that case me no the part Of
.he e1Sora;ion TO conform TO these requirements,
10 M ~ ~ Commissioners was confirmed Ibe!e
would seem therefore. 10 be no uOLVt ~ re
the Power Of h. the eeoEsdefed is as whether there
should be any any haSS Tsou2ed by the original de-
s,..on of 'A' O0nu ''q ~ tho epplca.
o3paTent gP St R an RRSnt @ MN
mat the security proposed 70 oe ;ho 80 ~ tho loss
clearly Inadequate to BToteC 5p eve it might advance
toOard The Construction Of the ROAD IN we and
Of the failure OF the contractor 10 'o''''e''
eH't 's,reested by the Board that ne dep0SI Sy
,be Contractor Of 81 "c0, in cash or us ul,,uS
we ; 20 The statute (Which is 70 be relutTH
70 The contractor upon the constr roso,tah he
r.s -, CO ~ the price Of construction 70 pe paiu
10 the contractor only upon ',,e consfrlc-
iSent; bond or several bonds 20 secI'c ne Total
.jor md e0uinnent but not renal - "a 90. -
emount Of such bonds not 10 eX 1GyyHshed by the
coHtractor pursuant 10 the siatute ana s a, in
ponu u,,' ,Sich with the cash value II the eqap-
a. an, shall be equal TO the estimated rental ios
ge ~ nrarent that the bond last mentioned up oI
ma Assuming that the road could be ~
ed Tor $50 CDoG'c as estimated Dy a5 e. GO 900
ca rsr.eatn rental would not much eNceeu S,''so,1,
as the cos; Of equipment Would be Iso m
guo00 to sl2ceoooo there would Ge make mo up the
penalty Of the bond.
THE CONTRACTOR AND THE CITY
y, res,ect 10 the Withholding OF reasonaoIe per
eentase OF the price Of construction uh'ii ON"
ton and equipment. We are IN no va! '.',0, '''4
20 UNA, the Commissioners think Wouid DC suCh
rs.orahle percentage; and II will bo apparent upon
moments reflection tlat sucA a - stvt ~ ~ me
!y is mos, onerous 10 ne cUilSt a'i M deysed
because il is requiring the contractor 70 Pu' ~
elIy IN sash wHe ~ ' ssme Object by tIedit
In respect 10 the city. the security would mt.'dSe
in proportion the work pros essed at.a oI,
waeii the construction and equipment WEI, UNI
p.eted whereas the city needs the hrFales, H.
lion from the failure or the contractor 10 GU Ou'
his contract of construction IN MS earlier stae,s' %
The oay other question taal ,,, rs o. ts SonI
REQUIRED by the Appellate Division Is excessive.
X may Of me he contractor that II he after
ing upon the work. a6andohs inc contrdet sl1WV.op
would be insufficient to put tho city In the same po-
stion which f. would have occupied h%d ne S0m-
pleted the contract Tie cause OF s!'a dDdilG , ~
inont Will only be for the reason mat me cost OF
Is much greater than the contract price
witch the city Is required 10 advance ana ne 2h!y
the Millions OF money which " viii have emoai he'd
In ths enterprise VIII be by ne completing OF tn9
work sef-which will necessarily be al Z cost 10 II
largely exceeding the contract price ana ms di-
furthermore. the ony Holey WHICH t',c ~, III,
tractor is pvt into the enterprise az ms own FISK
construction upon which the city Is to ho!4 a ne;;
- secure the provisions Of the contract-wn.ch VIII
ton 1, is estimated that this equipment viii cost
a. least s. 10000 In the event OF the failure OF the
Ylete the CONSTRUCTION this equipment Will also have
10 be furnished by the city, ana the amount eH-
bono II is thus al once seen thet the indemnify
exacc4 IS not only not excessive out would nQt IN
reality save the city from loss in OF the failure
esrv stages of construction The 10000 Of the
bod remsining after providing for equipment would
undouhtedly be more than swallowed up by the in
creased cost Of construction II the CITY were com
Il is undoubtedly true that the city Will be largely
protected 10 rents, maintenance and operadon by
Sgipmen, 10 be furnished by the contiact9r. But
= j. iupcratiyey necessary that II should nave
aiequate protection bv way Of security in the mat
'e, Of construction and equipment ,.,.,
several conditions and limited obligations. We are
o: the opinion that the conditions of tho bond should
provide that N400to) OF the bond should be ,ondl.
uonel upon construction ana equipment arg lnndt
10 contraction. equipment rents. maintenance and
operation. and that such bond may be executed ~
tcr a, ieas; 500 90 % the penalty ana iustfying
accord M TO tho statute.
furnish 10 ne city without the execution % security
such above requires
PRESIDENT ORR's COMMENT.
Alexander 7 orr. president Of the Rapid Transit
Conn ssion. when seen 10y Tribune reporter al
rs Office yesterday afternoon. faid: As under.
stand the decision Of the Appellate Division, II re-
moves the greatest obstacle II obtaining response
BE bids for the construction Of the underground
ToaG ! am I'm this expressing merely my own maj
vGun, opinion and do not represent tne Kapid
transit Commission. The opinion seems 70 remove
Tho fifteen nillion-ollar bond clause 80 far as 'he
''riod Of operation r. concerned The ionr'eeh'
nilor-dolar bond covering the period Of construc-
ion Is large one but not necessarily prohio''i'e
80 far ~ I can FEC now. The Conrts decision
makes the amount of The continuous bono 10 De
ocinahGed optional w:h The Rapid Transit 'oH'-
mission 50 long Il is not set at less ina"
10000 Fhc Commission may make II more nut
must no; make il less. OF course. have not han
time 10 examine the decision closely. b"t tHeSc
seem - he It's salient features"
M Orr declined to Say what the next step OF The
Rapid Transit Commission would be lie SAID. now
eyer that the Contract Committee would consider
TIE application o the Monhattan Elevated iSai-
way Company upon lis own merits and without
feieie1oe 20 the decision handed down YESTERDAY
"a l. BoaIdaan, one OF ne counsel for the i'apid