New-York tribune., 1903-07-16
STREET RAILWAY PARLoR CARS.


Whatever may be the legal right of the Brook
lyn Rapid Transit Company to charge a special
rate of fare for the of its parlor cars, there
will be general sympathy with the position OF
the Flatbush people who finding themselves un-
able to get accommodations elsewhere. pushed
into a parlor car and then refused to pay more
than the ordinary fare. The parlor car idea is
not without merit Many persons are glad TO
pay something for comfort and freedom from
manhandIing when riding on a streetcar. just
as they are when making a long railway jour
ney If conditions of travel permitted we
should be glad TO see on all our streetcar lines
special cars. where for an extra fare men and
women who wished to could travel under pleas
anter conditions than would be otherwise pos
sible Distances here are so great that cab
service is expensive, and often so slow as to be
unavailable People are compelled to use street
cars who in London Paris would use cabs.
If the street railways could devise what would
be something like cheap and expeditions cab
service on rails by parlor car system they
would meet a long felt want But no such thing
is possible so long as the facilities of the lines
are utterly inadequate to the demands of ordi-
nary traffic.
The first duty of the street railway companies
is to carry promptly and decently all who wish
to travel in the ordinary way. Until common
cars enough are provided to meet the public
demand parlor car is an imposition. 1t takes
up space which should be devoted to the regu-
lar business; it uses men and power to which
ordinary travellers have right A parlor car
should be a product Of surplus energies, not
something introduced at the expense of general
traffic, as it must be when ordinary cars are
too few to accommodate the travel and power
is so inadequate that the regular travel cannot
1o hnr, Io1, l,N,,k,
The Flatbush people who took possession Of
the parlOr car yesterday had long been accus-
toned to having their fares collected whether
seats were furnished them or not They nat
urally argued that it was poor rule which did
not work both ways. Having frequently paid
five cents each without being able TO get the
seats which were their due, because there were
no seats provided, strict logic led them to the
belief that they were in turn entitled. for FIVE
cents each, to seats when by chance vacant
seats were TO be found With them It was a
case of FIVE cents ride seats or no seats. If
they put up with no seats when seats were not
to be found they would take seats when there
We're any IF these were better seats than usual
that only Just compensation for many
ride at the end of a strap when a seat had been
paid for.
There is some dispute about the right of the
company to run cars for which it charges more
than the legal rate of fare. That question ought
to be settled. If authority exists for the prac-
tice such cars may be exceedingly servceable
in that far off future when transit facilities in
this city are equal 10 the necessities of the peo-
pie. Before luxuries of travel are provided,
however the simple, ordinary conveniences may
be rightly demanded. Just at present in every
borough of New-York every car, every man and
every watt Of energy is needed to give to the
people the accommodations which they have Il
right to expect for five cents