The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1903-06-19

1t is not at all clear who is charged with rejecting
this alleged plan which Mr.. Ramsey had. but as
Mr. Francis is declared to have been potent factor
in the rejection it is fair to assume that the Post
Dispatch that the plan ''set aside by the
Louisiana Exposition Company.
If this is the charge it is absolutely and unqual
fedly without foundation. The Exposition Company
has neither "set aside rejected any plan On
the contrary it has earnestly worked to the
operation of the steam railroads in the establishment
Of adequate system of steam transportation be-
tween the city and the Fair The only project pro-
posed for this purpose at any time is that the Ter1n
nal Association has promised to carry out If the leg
isation it is asking for is granted This belt line
was discussed before the Forest Park site was Sc
lected and the promise that it would be installed was
very important consideration in the location of the
Fair
Why the Post-pspatch endeavors to make out now
that President Ramsey's promise of bet-ne system
which influential in determining the location of
the Fair at Forest Park contemplated something diff
ferent from the belt line the Terminal Association is
now proposing nobody but the editor of the Post
Dispatch can tell There is occasion for ignorance
since any one who wishes can learn that Mr.. Ram
sey's plan and Mr. McChesneys plan are one and the
same plan. There has never been more than one plan.
But says the Post-Dispatch, Mr.. Ramsey says his
plan covered nterburban traffic and not the traffic
from the East which the loop is designed to take care
Of True enough But does the belt line the Ter
mina Association president talking about, for
it is not to be forgotten that they are one and the
None the less the levee loop which is designed
to take of traffic from the East is of large i'm
portance in the operation of the belt line for inter-
urban business
An essential link in the belt line as promised by
Mr. Ramsey two years ago and still promised by the
Is the elevated tracks along the
levee front. But that is also the highway which
large part of the passenger traffic from the East must
be carried. Its capacity is relatively limited and it
is not conceivable that it will accommodate the Worlds
Fair excursion trains together with the through pas
senger trains to and from the East at one and the
same, time without such measure of overcrowding
as will involve serious delay and inconvenience.
With the levee loop connecting the Eads Bridge with
the Union Station by Open-air route, the Eads
Bridge is made just desirable for passenger traffic
as the Merchants Bridge now is and four times as
many trains can be are now practicable. That
means the two tracks on the levee can be kept
clear least comparatively clear, for the Worlds
Fair excursion trains
It Is quite true in literal sense of course the
st-Dispatch declares that 1.-THE Terminal loop bill
connects the bridge tracks with Union Station tracks,
and tl.le in the literal way that 1T cannot be
made part of the proposed belt line to convey pas
sengers between the city and the Worlds Fair
grounds Yet in substance both of those declarations
untrue. The levee loop is an important feature
of the belt line project even it is part of the
belt line itself in the literal 1t will clear the
belt line tracks of large part of the through traffic
with which they must otherwise ,be overcrowded.
Performing that important service it becomes in the
true of the words part of the project, if not
of the belt line.
So much has been said about the intrusion of the
Worlds Fair into this controversy it is quite in place
to say that the Worlds Fair management cannot fur
Their the of that great enterprise without fur
therng the welfare of st. Louis. 1t is not private
business but public institution. Why should its
official representatives be silent when every private
individual has the right to speak?