New-York tribune., 1901-05-03
REBUKES THE ELEVATED.
GRAND JURY SAYS ANOTHER FOOT
PATH WOULD ALLEVIATE BRIDGE
CRUSH SOMEWHAT

The grand jury for the April term was dis
charged yesterday by Recorder Gof after it had
filed a presentment relative to the Brooklyn
Bridge crush. The presentment finds the over
crowding at both localities 10 be all that was
complained Of and at certain hours hazardous
to the health well the moral sensibiIities
Of women.
Little could be done with reference to remedy
ing the condition other than the prohibition TO
the entrance OF passengers only who required
transportation across the bridge. the document
says. 1t sets forth that II the funds and the
land at hand IL would require two years
10 provide a remedy, and that then the New
East River Bridge would be built and allevia-
tiOn provided.
The grand jury recommends another additional
footpath for incoming passengers at the City
Hall station and advises the Department OF
Public improvements to consult the Corporate.
Counsel as to it's powers in the premises. IL also
suggests that the Police Department may have
some power and recommends the same step
a part of the presentment says:
Concerning the City Hall station OF the Man
haitian Railway Company we find the railway
company has by raising a footpath on the east
side Of the City Hall station TO level with the
present platform, furnished egress To incoming
passengers from the east side Of the station.
The railway officials state that IL a like altera-
tiOn could be made 10 a footpath now on the
west side Of the structure like egress would be
given TO incoming passengers and thus do away
entirely with the crowGng and pushing here
tofore complained Of. The railway officials
state that such an alteration is prohibited by
injunction
The presentment. after reviewing the history
Of the injunctiOns against the railway company
obtained by the late Oswald Ottendorfer and
the "staats Zeitung." prohibiting the construc-
tion of railway facilities at Chatham-st. and
Tryon Row, and citing the subsequent building
of a bridge passa geway across Park Row and
Centre-st. on the agreement Of the railroad
companies that they would not make any
changes other than those to which the "Staats
Zeitung" agreed says:
The officials of the railroad companies present
that those injunctions and this agreement pro
hibit them from the slightest alterations or
change of their structure at that point. We
find however. that change has been made at
that point and that place by the raising of
the footway aforesaid, and we of the opinion
that if such injunction and agreement were con-
sdered so sweeping as 10 interfere with the
raising Of the pathway on the west side. which
in effect would afford better light and less in
reference with any easement of the "Staats
Zeitung' Building, the elevated railroad com
panes by elevating the east pathway in effect
ignored such injunction, since the east side OF
the station structure we'll as the west side is
III front of this building upon the Park Row
The grand Jury has observed that this allevia-
ton. although matter of small expense. was
only affected after considerabl public clamor
and discussion Of this plain disregard of public
that the railroad companies and their counsel
ought readily TO recognize that the njunctions
and agreement could not be considered to con-
tinue a condition of the structure in its present
form against an alteration. which would in
effect lessen any suggested infringement upon
the easement of the "Staats Zeitung" Building
by the recent structure.
1t is obvious that the mere elevation of the
station platform of a footway already in
istence is no violation of the spirit of the agree
ment between the "Staats Zetung" and the rail
road company. IL indeed it is departure from
its letter.
Julien T. Davies, of counsel for the Manhattan
railroad. said he considered the injunction pre-
vented any Improvement the west side of the
City Hall station, but he not prepared last
night to argue the point raised by the grand
jury nor would be be until he had had time to
read the presentment carefully and look up the
law the subject.
Bridge Commissioner Shea was asked if he
thought that any of the grand jury's recon-
mendations would alleviate she trouble and re
piled that in his estimation they would not.
In my Judgment said Commissioner Shea,
mo permanent relief be afforded by any
OF the schemes suggested from time to time
though the proposed extension of the entrance
would relieve the situation, possibly, for time
II has long been my opinion that the completion
of the New East River Bridge is the only thing
that will give any relief Even at that we must
go on building new bridges / do not believe
that the Board of Public Improvements has any
right or authority to take action in the matter
nor the police
Corporation Counsel WhaIen did not see any
prospect of relief in the suggestions.
Charles A. Gardiner. counsel for the Manhat-
tan Elevated Railway Company, seemed par
ticularly pleased at the grand jury's belief that
the owners of the "Staats Zeitung'' Building
would heartily concur in the elevation of the
footpath on the west side of the City Hall sta
tion.
At the office of Vice-President Alfred Skitt it
was stated that the company has at all times
been ready TO cooperate in any plan for the re-
lieving of the conditions II 1t was possible for
the company 10 elevate the footpath on the west
side without violation Of the injunction il would
rRfrfOr
as TO the judgment of the grand jury concerning
the Injunction