New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-08-01
4 sUBTERRANEAN MYSTERY.

If members of the Rapid Transit Commission
and underground railroad contractors, actual or
prospective, have been taking it for granted
that there would be no general objection to the
digging of future tunnels by the same methods
and processes which have been employed in
the work now nearing completion, they have
been undeceived this week. They will not deny
that the opposition is already formidable or
that, though It has found rather sudden express
sion, it is far more likely to increase than to
diminish. AS we have often said, the aft11c-
tions of the last three years have been endured
with extraordinary patience. but the thought OF
similar conditions being produced along the line
OF Broadway from Forty Second-st. TO Union
Square, and perhaps thence to the City Hall,
not to speak of the remoteT prospect of sue
cessive excavations in other parts of the city, is
intolerable
The declarations on the subject by Mr.. Grout
Mr.. Mcdonald and Mr.. Parsons, the commits
sion's chief engineer, which were generally
published yesterday are satisfactory in some
but not in all respects. The contractor and the
engineer acknowledge that much has been
learned in the process of constructing the first
underground road, and express a belief that
future operations of the cut and cover order
might be conducted with far less loss and an
that the public has paid too heavy a penalty
for the transportation facilities which it may be
enjoying within a year, it is acceptable to that
extent But Broadway merchants and other
citizens to whom the free use of that thorough
fare is indispensable are evidently sceptical.
The most gratifying announcement of an official
character which the present demonstration of
public feeling has evoked is that before any
plan for new route is adopted an ample op-
portunity for discussion will be given.
While Mr. Parsons conveys the distinct i'm
preston that he does not believe deep tunnels
avoiding disturbance of the surface except for
necessary shafts at certain points, should be
built in any part of the city hereafter, he re-
fuses to be drawn into a discussion Of that
question at the present time Now, it is natural
and reasonable that he should decline to COM
nit himself positively in advance, but we can
not see why he should shrink from frankly ex-
planning the comparative advantages and dis
advantages of the deep tunnel system as he I'M
derstands them. 1t Is conceded that the public
shall have fair chance to signify it's opinions
and wishes prior to the definite adoption of any
plan. Why, then, should engineers, presumably
possessing superior if not full knowledge Of the
subject decline to enlighten the public? We
are not surprised at their attitude for it is the
attitude which they have maintained from the
beginning. We have endeavored over and over
again in the course of the last five years to OBJ
tain a clear, candid and illuminating statement
of the reasons why the cut and cover system
inevitably productive Of immense loss and dis
comfort, was chosen in preference to the sys-
tenn which has been employed in London with
scarcely any inconvenience TO the public, and
why it seemed to be assumed as a matter of
course that the methods originally used in this
city must continue to be used in all subsequent
undertakings Of like kind. But we have never
succeeded in getting a satisfactory or even a
responsive explanation.
This professional reticence is mysterious and
provoking. Wherein lies the extraordinary
delicacy of the question? Why would the
pouring of light upon it be a proclamation? 1t
legitimately interests the public, and sooner or
later the public viii exact complete and def
mite answer from those in authority We can
see no reason why they should not impart what
ever knowledge they now possess without fur
Their delay.