New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-02-19
NAY BE A COLOSSAL GRAB
'ELM-ST. NIGHT BE T1KEN.
4lbauy Railroad Bills Regarded
5cith Suspicion.
rpr -rrrouAru TO TIE rR1Brxr.l

TFY ~rrrGRAPH To TIVE TRIBrNF.1
Albany. Feb. 1S-Nestling snugly in one Of
the five railway bills described IN this mornings
/ Tribune and introduced at the request Of the
law firm Of Guthrie. Cravath & Henderson,
counsel Tor the New-YorI City Railway Com
many is one OF the most surprising and remark
able legislative propositions that has yet ap-
/ peared this session II the opinion Of those
familiar with railroad law is correct, this
measure Is aimed 20 surrender to the New-York
/ City Railway Elm-st and Lafayette Place from
Astor Place TO the southern end Of the former
thoroughfare and 10 make this surrender with
out providing the city with the slightest com
pensation therefor. Further. it allows any Of
the streets in New-York city now unused by
surface railways TO he taken and occupied with
out remuneration 10 the city. providing only
that they proceed in the general direction OF
existing railways. This apparently colossal
grab is prefaced by a provision allowing street
surface railways IN cities. with the consent of
the Mayor and on the certifcation Of a railroad
4 commissioner that the tracks are not needed, 10
remove tracks from any street without forfeit
ing their right 10 use such streets at later time
Then follows this astonishing amendment:
As provided in Section 81 and on the approval OF
the Board % Railroad Commissioners. any street
surface railroad company owning ralltoa1 @ oI r.,
NAV remove its road OF route a portion thereon
70 & and Tsoete r s9ge 5q TSS rG Droyaed at the re-
located road or route or part thereoI shal run & ~
or part thereof which shall be SO removed. and IN
Fuch case may construct and operate its roads in
euch other streets or Highways under the terms
Of the grant franchise or municipal consent uToer
that the consent Of the owners ~ one-h -hat or te ne
value Of the proper'y oogis1 ,i-s5 81 a. nroyided in
section 81. f such consent cannot oe
/ route sbCsjd he constructed may be made by a
/ railroad commissioner provided By Section sL
WHAT MIGHT BE DONE UNDER BILL
Tor example cars on he Fourth-ave line as
At present operated run down Fo1rth-ave. 10 the
Boverv from the BoweTy cross 10 Centre-st- IN
Broome-st.. returning by Grand-st and thus 10
the end u Centre-st- The widening and eNten-
sion of T,lr7-st. have opened more direct and
much quicker route. proceeding In the same d.
rectIon. and already occupied beneath the sur
face by the subway. Thousands Of dollars have
been expended by the city for the Improvement
/ of FIr1-st and this scheme as the proposed
law is interpreted here. would merely require
that the New York City Railway should sho"
what i- rnanifestly obvious that relocation IN
/ Elm-st would leave their tracks proceeding IN
the same general direction. and get the consent
! OF one-half % the property owners OF deter
/ miEation from the Railroad Commission. Ihen
the city would be forced 20 stand by and see
this broad thorougnfare. the franchise for which
Ebolla re worth thousands Of dollars, calmly ap-
/ p-orr,ated under this law without the payment
/ ~ a single cent eithe- for the franchise or for
/ rental
! elc+ lees rerrarlza bic though far less sweep
Ing in its effect in the matter OF public renunera-
tion. n not IN that Of public convenience Is the
second of the railroad measures introduced by
] tba counsel Of the Nev-Tork city Railway COM
papv. providing Justification for street surface
! railroads in its refusal to give transfers Inns
! amendment reads as follows
The Board Of Railroad commssions,rs sha have
the power 10 exempt any street surIaGe " & coiiay t
from giving transfers AZ any point 9i ,
NJ IN ls for the puhlc benefit through dimin-
tII-e lie danger OF accidents or reducing the con-
gestion q trafic
! ,,,,la raeection would establish the fact that
,ters are few. II any. places in the lover part
., Seyy-Yorlz city where refusal TO give trans
,e-s would not materially diminish the danger or
I ,,,cidents. Transfer points such as those on the
! 1so-erv on Fourth-ave., and any congested
-avts of the city generally, must certainly be
.ar5as as a fruitful cause OF accident The
reople who get transfer from BoweTy car
a. T4ouston-st where there are four tracks and
| > ,..+ amount OF traffic. are certainly running
some risk In making the transfer but the whole
tendency in the last few years has been In the
airect,on OF forcing street surface railways to
give transfers.
MIGHT STOP TRANSFERS SOUTH OF
\ =
This act II I5assed would. so far as the ques-
! ,ion OF r,,blic safety the question OF conges-
| ,to, OF traffic IS concerned. justify the New
york CITY Railway Company in attempting to
/ refuse transfers at any point south OF bifty-
ninth-st.. and the apparent safeguards PROVIDED
ere regar,ied here rather as subterfuges than as
real checks. Certainly the recent victory OF
lanes 3. Lohuaier and various West Side or
ganizations in the matter OF transfers indicates
rublic desire for more transfers despite the
fact that every transfer in a crowded streeI
carries a certain element OF risk.
The third remarkable measure IN THIS group
vyhtch IS introduced with the pleasing eXplaha-
ton that II Is intended 10 assist IN protecting
Investors in street railroad securities and remedy
= certain hardshirs in the existing law. provides
b r,ercifullv that. while the law now says that
D am railroad which shall not. within five years
aftar the granting OF its charter begin work and
xend 10 per cent OF its capital stock. said rail-
roaa,s corrorate power shall cease. Under the
nav arranrcuent the charter may be forfeited,
Continued oa fourth
Ice mountain OF rs feet formed from the spray al
q N5erara Fails Wonderful frost effects ls Lralns
z day from New York BY A.T foFk S-sAIsss ans