New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-04-01
CITIZENS UNION AND RAPID TRANSIT.
Secretary Murphy Explains What He Really
Did Say at Albany.
To the Editor OF The Tribune.


Sir: regret to have to call your attention to an
inaccuracy In the very full and intelligent report
OF the hearing before the Cities Committee OF the
Assembly the Rapid Transit bills. wherein the
following sentence appears attributed to me:
To this end II (the Citizens I-nion) had o-.-e5
70 agree to an amendment granting to the Rapid
Transit Commission the option Of letting contracts
ton either together separately thus placing the
responsibility on the commission. bur this offer Tad
been rejected.
AS matter Of fact stated that the Citizens
Union reafirmed its belief in the Importance OF the
amendments to the Rapid Transit law contained In
the Elsberg bill. and believed that the public IN
terests would be best served by the enactment OF
them ALL that the Citizens Union however. did not
wish to place IT within the power Of any person
lay the responsibility for obstruction at It's door.
and that, the fundamental objection OF the
Rapid Transit Commission seemed to be to the
provision compelling the separation OF contracts for
construction and operation. we were willing to ac-
cept a compromise this point TO the extent Of
giving the option in the matter to the Rapid Tran
SIT Commission and the Board Of Estimate and Ap-
portionment to determine whether they would or
would not separate such contracts, such option 10
be exercised by majorities OF both bodies
The explanation OF this suggestion for a nodih-
cation OF the original demands OF the Elsberg bill
was the fact that at meeting OF the Rapid Tran
sit Commission It proposed that the separa-
ton of contracts for construction and operation
should only take place when authorized by a pop
ular vote. subsequently to be ratified by six votes
OF eight OF the Rapid Transit Commission and
twelve OF the sixteen in the Board OF Estimate
and Apportionment. thus requiring addition to
q referendum, three-Quarter vote OF the two bod
les having authority. Our suggestion means that
simply a majority OF each of the bodies shall be
sufficient 10 require the separation OF the contracts
said that by, giving the commission the option
under the conditions OF cur suggestion the respon-
sibility would be placed Cor such action might
be taken upon the commission. instead Of permit
ting the plea to be made that they simply
complying with obligatory provision OF the pres
ent law This offer OF compromise did involve
the abandonment Of any other OF the amendments
proposed by the Citizens Union in the Elsberg bill
1t is stated further that presented a resolution
"favorng the Elsberg bill" No such resolution was
necessary after the positive stand taken by the
Union. The resolution which did present as
follows:
The representatives OF the Citizens Unfn havs
conferred with the counsel OF the Rapid Transit
Commission in the hope Of arriving rapid tran
sit measure that would be acceptable both par
They regret that they have found IL impossI-
BILE TO arrive at satisfactory conclusion. The
Union learns that the fundamental objection Of the
Rapid Transit Commission to the Elsberg bill Is in
the provision separating the contracts construc
that 10 is willing to modify It's views TO the ex-
tent OF giving the Rapid Transit Commission to-
gether with the Board of Estimate and Apportion-
ment. the option TO determine whether II will or
will separate the contracts for construction ami
operation. the power TO be exercised by the con-
current matorities OF both bodies
JOHN J. MURPHY
Secretary Citizens Union of the City OF New-York
New-York City. March 81. 1901.