The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-06-13

comment which has been
L y IL made upon the legisla
tcn at Harrisburg rclat :
ing to rapid transit has been purpose
ly unfair. There has been an cndca =
vor tn create the impression that this
legislation was vicious in inception
and put forward in the interest of
speculative politicians. 1t has been
characterized as dcbauch of pro-
iliSacy ard copious denuncation has
been levoled at its projectors and
boneticIaries What is the basis to
warrant such statements:
In many of the communities of
Pennsylvania, our own prominent
among them. existing facilities for the
quick conveyance of the people be-
tween their places of employment and
places of abode We're notoriously in
sufficient or unsatisfactory. In some
of these places the rapid transit COM
panies had captured and buried just
enough franchises to forestall profit
able competition. and thus fortified,
were Indifferent to the publcs clamor
for better service. The newly enacted
legislation works forfeiture of Sated
franchises and requires that streets
with tracks not operated shall be open
to new enterprise. This feature is of
self-evident merit and it's enactment
parks a noteworthy advance in the
commonwealth relationship to pub
lie service corporations
1t is true that the lcgiSla ation gives
large rights to new rapid transit COM
panies. Among these is the right of
eminent domain whereby the obstin-
acy of cantankcrous individuals is pre-
vented from multiplying the convenience
OF the many. But this works no in
justice: for the act cmbodies this clear
qualification: "Such corpora tions
however, shall in all cases make just
compensation for all property taken,
injured or destroyed by the conStruc-
tlon or enlargement of their railway.
If the parties claiming COMPENSATION
and the said corporation, so chartered
under this act, shall not be able to
agree as to the amount of conpeusa-
tion To be paid by reason of the con-
Sd!d road. then the court of common
ll"as of the proper county, upon peti-
l.hn of any person in interest. shall
appoint five persons to view and as
Sc+S the compensation due to all per-
sons, corporations or bodies public
that have failed To agree with the cor
p"ration SO chartered by reason of the
construction, maintenance and opera
,un ur the said road and its branches
ur os its stations and approa cheS and
make report thereof to court" Such
report is subject To protest, -whercupon
the amount of compensation shall he
determined by a jury Those who
have had experience with viewers re-
ports do not need tn be assured that
in an Issue between a citizen and n
corporation ii Is rarely the former that
gets worsted.
What Is not true of this legislation
il that it takes away from the COM
muDiticS any Of the rights now eXer-
Cised by them Any number of per-
SONS not less than five can incorporate
but M company 81 chartered can lay
. rail or ~move Il wheel until il has
first received the consent of the local
authorities. This consent is not quail
fed. II may he unconditional or it
may he coupled with conditions as to
rates ofafare. frequency of cars, paw
ing and care of streets used or other
atipulaiions deemed prudent by the
Misunderstanding body, To say. as has
been said in some of the newspapers
evidently inspired by existing trolley
companies, that the Focht bill contem-
plates a wholesale rape of the streets
IS to say what is not true. Local con-
sent is'the crux of the problem; but
once given, the company which gets it
las five Years in which to develop its
plans. This makes it desirable that
consent should follow thorough inquiry
and be the fruit of deliberation.