New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-12-31
RAPID TRANSIT EXTENSION.

The elaborate plan for new rapid transit
routes worked out by Mr.. Parsons presents
more questions for the consideration OF the
commission and the public than brief survey
can probably cover. He has avowedly kept In
view the advantages of a brisk competition for
future contracts. and has endeavored to frame
a scheme which will appeal both to the COM
pany operating the present subway and to the
surface railroad interests, while he seems TO
think II will also attract the favorable attention
of capitalists not connected with either OF those
powerful factors in tn transportation business.
Whether or not the compromise thus proposed
will prove reasonably satisfactory to the appli'
cants FROM whose rivalry the community has
been expecting to derive notable benefits
mains to be seen. 1t is certain that plans differ
ing in some important respects from those de-
vised by Mr.. Parsons have been advocated III
their respective interests. and both are likely
TO contend that the public welfare demands
various notifications Of his scheme.
Everybody who has discussed the subject ac-
knowledges the necessity OF an East Side line,
and Lexington-ave. is the route to which public
opinion is generally inclined. Between Union
Square and the Brooklyn Bridge there is an
East Side region which Mr.. Parsons leaves out
Of the calculation perhaps because Of engineer
ing difficulties and perhaps because the elevated
roads are thought to afford sufficient facilities.
The corresponding section on the West Side is
better taken care of, while the loop arrange
ment at the lower end of the city and the sew
eral crosstown connections seem well adapted
TO meet tie requirements OF public convenience,
either as parts OF an independent system or In
combination with the existing subway 1t must
be admitted however, that at first thought Mr..
Parsons's plan appears to st in particularly well
with the Interborough company's lines already
in operation.
fG lof has hoo FrOr1 In ha-
ginning that the really fundamental question to
be decided is whether the public has most to
gain from combination Of subways in one sys-
TEN, giving access for single fare TO all points
which they touch, or from free transfers be-
tween Independent subway and the surface
roads plus the natural benefits resulting from
competition. That is a question to which every
intelligent citizen must have given some consid-
GRAFTON, but it has not as yet provoked much
public discussion. 1t ought to be competently
debated before the Rapid Transit Commission
at the hearings which are to begin two weeks
hence, and we see no reason why the commits.
sloners themselves, without prematurely signi-
Tying preference, should not develop the argu-
nents on both sides which they must have been
anxiously weighing during the last year at
least AS we have already said. the prospec-
| tive competition for the franchise gives the
city an advantage OF position which IS practi-
".
the contract may ultimately be awarded
One feature of Mr.. Parsons's scheme Will pro-
woke some opposition namely. the proposed ele-
waited railroad extensions. We were much struck
by Mr.. OTIS remark the other day that the de-
velopment Of transportation facilities beneath
the surface might cause the elevated roads to
disappear In the not distant future. Perhaps
Mr. Orr expressed hope rather than an ex-
pectauon, bat yet he spoke with a measure of
confidence, and what he said suggests once
more the question whether It is wise 10 permit
the overhead viaduct system to occupy any new
routes To the construction Of express tracks
over the present Second-ave line there is not
likely TO be serious objection bit the appropria-
non OF additional streets by the elevated rail
foacs IN any part of city which is growing
with marvellous rapidty is another question.
As for the Brooklyn end of Mr.. Parsops's
scheme, that is a subject which must be re-
served for separate treatment.