New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-10-30
TRAMPLE, SAYS WARNER.
sc Ids IN SUBWAYILLEGAL
We'll Kno5On La5cyer AdUises Pub
JIG to Tear Them DovCn.

The storm OF indignant protest against the ad-
vertising signs in the subway stations grows
almost hourly in intensity and volume. BY yes
terday's indications it bids fair to swell into
hurricane
Not only is the fragrant character OF the signs
assaied, but the very legality Of their existence
in the stations is hotly challenged. Authorities
last night seemed agreed that the stations were
exclusively public property. and that the Rapid
Transit Commission. the InterboTough operating
company anybody whatsoever had no right
to authorize. much less INSTALL the outrageous
eyesores
On every hand apparently, the public surprise
at the presence Of the signs has given place to
disgust and indignation at the vandalism be-
trayed by those responsible for the precious
exhibits.
In conversation with Tribune reporter last
night John De Witt Warner not only forswore
the counsels Of perfection but deliberately urged
the public to take the law into its own hands.
and to disigure, tear. kick. smash and tranple
the offending advertisements underfoot.
AS the deliberate counsel Of a man who Is
not only chairman Of the Municipal Art Com
mission and trustee both Of the Metropolitan
Museum OF Art and the Municipal Art Society
but also a sane Ievel-headed lawyer and
member of a we'll known legal firm. Mr. War
ner's advice, which he declared might be fol-
lowed with inpunity, is of startling significance
and tends to confirm the impression that the
public sentiment of fitness and propriety has
been stirred TO the depths.
VIOLATION OF RIGHTS. SAYS WARNER.
"On this subject" Mr.. Warner told the
porter. you cannot possibly quote me too
strongly. The operating company has no more
right to let out advertising contracts in the sub
way stations than it has TO give concessions for
candy stores or peanut stands. The stations are
the property of the public and theirs alone, For
advertising facilities under the city's lands to be
let in this manner. and so as to obstruct the in
gress and egress Of passengers. or in any wise TO
lessen the space accommodation, is as impUdent
an object lesson as can possibly be imagined
These stations are as exclusively public places
as are the highways and sidewalks. Such OBJ
structions or litter are much nuisance as if
left on the sidewalk. and are entitled to pre-
cisely the same treatment as would be meted 10
them outside"
What would you advise the public TO do?''
asked the reporter. Would it not be better 70
wait and institute legal proceedings looking to
their abolition?"
81 would advise the public" said Mr. Warner.
"summariy to turn them to the wall, knock
them in, kick them out of the waY-do any
thing that will cause their disappearance"
It know what legal proceedings might mean
contests of the suits. delays and so forth
Gould not any person be legally arrested for
following this advice?''
COULD NOT BE ARRESTED.
He could not" said Mr.. Warner The ad-
vectising signboards have no more right there
than they would have if placed in the middle
Of sidewalk or in the public streets"
Would it not be we'll to institute taxpay-
er's suit?"
.eyyae Ia+ that ba done TOO 7 an, sure that the
suit could be maintained"
How about the advertisements in the subway
cars?"
That is another story. But the advertise
ments have the same right to appear as they
have in the elevated trains and on the elevated
platforms. There is here no analogy between
the two systems
But provision in the Interborough's lease"
observed the reporter. provides that the con-
tractor shall not permit advertising in the STA
tions or cars which will interfere with easy
identification of stations or otherwise interfere
with efficient operation.
"Ah. that's one of those Jokers' that almost
invariably creep in" said Mr.. Warner Its
purpose was not to permit advertising at the
stations. but simply to forbid certain abuses.
The advertising signs at the stations are clear
violation Of the law"
Calvin Tomkins. the president OF the Munich
pal Art Society. said it was improbable that
his society would take any action until the next
meeting, about the middle Of November. With
Mr.. Warner. he said that, from what he had
heard and read on the subject. the provision in
the Interborough's lease was designed rather TO
restrict abuses than 70 permit advertising in
the stations.
When told of the indignation expressed by
Mr. Warner. he added that Mr.. Warner might
be said to reflect the society's opinion ques-
tions Of this nature.
Frank Hedley. general manager of the Inter
borough company declined further to discuss
the subject.
PARkER,S IGNORANCE VS. TIE EACrs