New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-05-04
REMSFN GAS HEARING.
FIVE HOURS OF DEBATE.
Both Sides Present arguments to
GOUernOr-4 NesU Point.


and attack the Rensen East River Gas BILL
passed by the legislature and signed by Mayor
Mcclellan, served to emphasize to Governor Odep
the various arguments made on the measure here
tofore. Representatives OF the Citizens Union the
Merchants Association, the West End Associa-
ton. the Peoples Institute and half dozen other
public bodies attacked the measure.
The principal speakers against the bill were z. B.
Whitney and Charles Sprague Smith. representing
the Peoples Institute; Julius Henry Cohen. repre-
senting the Citizens Union; H D. Dumont, repre-
senting the Merchants Association; Henry w.
Goodrich. representing the City Club; James L
Conway. representing the United Real Estate Own
ers' Association. and August Wiggers. Of the Real
Estate Owners Protective Association. On behalf
of the measure. John A. Carver. counsel for the
East River Gas Company, made the principal plea
Francis 3. Thurber F. W. Curtis. and Alexander
S. Williams appeared taxpayers. and spoke for
the bill a letter read from ex-Secretary Elihu
Root expressing the opinion that the bill was prop
er measure Similar tements weresread from half
a dozen prominent lawyers and citizens. The chief
argument advanced in favor of the measure was
the fact that Mayor Mcclellan had signed It, and
that a veto by the Governor would be a violation
of home rule principles. In the OF his de-
fence OF the BILL Mr.. Carver denounced the attitude
Of the press bitterly while the representatives OF
the various public bodies he described as self
constituted guardians OF public safety
A NEW POINT AGAINST BILL
The principal argument against the measure was
marks that he had been retained by Incorporation
Counsel RIves special counsel in this casa when
the former bill pending before ex-Mayor Low.
The main new point made by Mr.. Whitney
that the declaration advanced by the company,
that the bill simply patched up old assignment
made to the East River company by the Empire
Gas Lighting Company and subsequently lost. was
irrelevant, since the right to assign powers was
not possessed by gas companies until many years
after the declaration was made that the documents
had been lost.
Mr.. Whitney argued that the fundamental OBJ
lection to the measure that It violated the
charter in comforting a franchise without com
pensation and in perpetuty instead Of for twenty
five years, and subject TO terms fixed by local au-
thorities. He traced the history OF the original
grant, saying that it came from the Tweed legts-
lature in the form Of paragraph 'sneaked' into
an amendment Of the charter Of Long Island City
which. he said itself fraud on the public.
He declared that under the conditions existing
when the charter granted. It had life OF
only fifty years, and that thirty three had elapsed.
Henry w. Goodrich. representing the City Club.
explained IN opening his address that he was at
the hearing to make protest against the bill, de-
spite the fact that the present president OF the
City Club and two former presidents had advised
that the bill was proper ont. by the unanimous
direction Of a committee OF the City Club He
dwelt the opposition OF that organization to the
violation OF the principle of home rule contained
in the bill, to the practice OF giving away per-
petual franchises. and specifically the fact that
the Remsen measure granted territorial increase
OF franchise in Long Island City. He substituted
for the bin measure which he explained would
This provided compensation for the city for a
on the removal OF the gas plants Of the various
companies M Operated ~ the Consolidated Gas Com
MERITS OF MEASURE EXPLAINED.
The afternoon hearing was devoted to the OK
PLANTATION OF the merits Of the measure by its
friends. John A Carver appeared counsel for
the gas company and presented the formal argu-
u1ent. He dwelt for considerable time the
home rule phase of the situation declaring that
the opponents Of the bin had asserted It sub
xeIslVe OF that principle, when in point OF fact
measure was the real violation of the principle.
the legislature and had been vetoed by ex-Mayor
Low because it contained an electrical franchise
was - OF two kinds. that fostered by The press.
and the Opposition of Varo9s public bodies The
speaker presented opinions from Wheeler II. Peck
prove the measure did not confer additional fran
t Sneaker, sc d me op9Ison OF many Of
Hepburn and Theodore Meyers declaring they had
proper measure He also introduced an opinion
not part with any right now possessed by tho
Mr. Carver read petition signed by the repre-
sentatives of sixty-five large insurance companies
doing business in New-York City, and representing
provement of removing all of the gas works of the
lowed to he consummated. There also presented
list of those who were induced to sign a petition
cason to study its provisions, have requested the
Governor to disregard their former requests, and a
list containing the names of business men
on numerOusly signed petition presented in favor
of the measure. Mr. Carver read also letter from
Governor Roosevelt TO the State Land Board writ
ten in 1885, in which he recommended that the
board sell TO the company certain lands under
water in Astoria needed by the company to con-
f. 3. Thurber. Alexander s. Williams and r. w
Curtis appeared as taxpayers in favor OF the
measure.
In closing argument against the bill E p
Whitney replied TO the arguments OF Mr. Graver