New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-12-16
WON'T GIVE Up FIGHT.
Speakers Unite in Placing RESPONSE
bllity on the NaYOr.

The merits and dement's of the subway signs
were presented last night at the annual dinner
OF the Independent Club. held at Breton Hail.
when Calvin Tomkins told of the work of the
Municipal Art Society to have them taken out of
the subway and Albert b. Boardman of coun-
sci for the Rapid Transit Commission, agreed
with almost every point Mr.. Tomkns made
save that the commission should take the ques-
ton into the courts. 1t would be eminentIy
proper for the Mayor to order the signs taken
out of the subway Mr. Boardman declared and
he would do it if he were Mayor. 1t would be
quite as proper for him order the Corpora ton
Counsel to institute suit to compel their re-
moval but the Rapid Transit Commission hav-
ing made contract. whether 1t had the right or
not, was hardly empowered to go into the
courts.
MIR. Tomkins, the first speaker to treat of
the signs said that there two kinds of ad-
vertising-that in public places on public prop
erty and that in private places on private
property Most of the signs around the city
were on private property, where it was possible
only 10 limited extent to control them. The
Pallas signs around the new library. the subway
signs and the signs on the elevated stations
were all on public property. and alike Illegal as
far he could determine. 1t was q serious
condition. considering the extent to which this
usurpation of public property might be carried.
made to plaster the fence around another new
public building with signs.
In Washington the advertising was restricted,
went on Mr. Tomkns. There could be ad-
Nertising in residence streets unless the people
across the way gave their permission. In
Europe advertising was regarded as a public
franchise. and taxes were levied on all signs.
The only right the subway operating COM
pany could have 70 the advertising privilege, he
said. was under its right to operate railroad,
in which opinion the counsel for the Rapid
Transit Commission had joined. There was no
other railroad just of this class in the country.
the Boston subway, where advertising
prohibited but even steam railroads did not
plaster signs around their stations The subway
was street, which had been pre-empted by an
aggressive corporation, and the sooner the right
of the public 10 its property was taken 10 the
for settlament the better thought Mr..
Tomkins. The opponents Of the signs We're
looking to the Mayor whom rested respon-
sibility for action. If the Mayor did not take
the signs some other one would, and until they
We're removed they would be constant indict-
ment of every administration.
Mr.. Boardman. after joking much bout the
signs, got down to earnestness when he admit
ted that he didn't like then! al be Ten than
Mr. TOmkfnS, and agreed with most that his
predecessor had said. The question of law
garding the taking out of the signs, however he
considered not free from doubt, there
no precedent to guide any judge in deciding
The nearest came to "obter dictum," in
which the judge had said that signs the ee-
waited stations had business there. but did
order their removal
The commission could not aid retard the
presentation of the question to the courts. The
Mayor could ask the Corporation Counsel if the
signs invasion of public rights. and
there was nothing to prevent the Corporation
Counsel bringing the question to the attention
of the courts.
If there is a substantial expression of public
opinion in that direction, and I think there is"
went on NJ. Boardman. its right for him to
do so; and If this Mayor and this Corporation
Counsel don't, some other will
The Rapid Transit Commission is In n
different position. We put nothing in the
tracts permitting advertising. The counsel for
the Municipal Art Society hold that the only
rights conferred were those concerning the
operating of a railroad and I'm not saying that
they're not right. Still, couldn't ask the
courts pass our contract. The Corpora
ton Counsel could, and If the courts upheld
this view there would be way to have
the signs remOved-possibly mandamus 10
the Police Department compelling it to do it's
duty"
James S. Lehmaier told of the work of the
Transit Reform Committee of one Hundred in
tie transfer cases.