New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-11-25
SMASH LENOX-AVE. TILES
SIGNS IN SUBWAY BRANCH
Procedure an X. Z. Boards Erpected
Court fiction Outlined.

Repeating their defiance of the resolutions OF
'he RAPID Transit Commission. Ward & Cow
yesterday continued to nail signs 10 the walls If
the stations in the Lenox-ave branch of the
SUBWAY The station at One hundred-and- twen-
ty-hitn-st. was entirely completed last evening
ana the Tiles were smashed just as they were in
the West Side branch. There were signs in the
Observation-Disclosures One-hundred-
and-tenth-st. and One-hundred- and thirty fifth
St stations. but they were not nailed TO the
walls. This will probably be done to-day or this
evening.
Although ii is in open defiance of the resolu-
ton passed by the Rapid Transit Commission
this mailing OF signs to the walls and smashing
the tiles for which the pubIic's money was ex-
pended win probably result in no penalty for
the advertising concern. and have no bearing on
the ultimate decision of the case by the courts
For the Interborough company which must be
in close business relations with the city for the
next fifty years. coming constantly before the
Rapid Transit Commission to ask favors this
setting at naught of the wishes of the commits
sion is poor policy. yesterday declared a man
In close touch with the legal aspect OF the case.
The least the operating company could do would
be to restrain the impetuOsity OF the advertising
men, III Difference to the wishes of the commits
sion, until the chief engineer of the commission
had made his report TO the method OF regulat-
ing the signs, when the operating company could
present formally its objections to this PLAN
with the protests of the advertising concern.
Any legal action in regard TO the signs must
wait until the next meeting of the Rapid Transit
Commission when Mr. Parsons. the chief en-
gineer will present to the commission n dia-
gram of each station. on which the space TO be
allotted TO advertising signs will be indicated.
along with the rules and regulations govern
ing the signs called for by the commission. When
this is received, the commission probably will
pass formal resolution declaring that signs
shall be allowed nowhere IN the stations ex-
cept where the diagrams of the chief engineer
have indicated.
Then Ward & Cow having beplastered each
station with their signs. the counsel for the COM
mission will go before the court with an appli-
cation to compel the removal of all signs which
do not conform the chief engineers dia-
grams declaring that these signs interfere with
the ready Identification OF the stations To this
the counsel for Ward & Cow will probably n
swer that the signs do not interfere with the
ready identification of the stations. supporting
their statement by affidavits in direct contra
dictiOn to the affidavits submitted by the law
yerS for the commission which would say that
the signs were positive. distinct obstruction
to the identification of the stations. Then II
would be for the court to decide which side had
the right, and il being a case where the de-
cisiOn would be entirely according 10 the quail
fiCatiOns of the average human. the court would
probably decide according to his ObSerV3-
tons, or give the benefit Of the doubt to the
more fallible portion of humanity, the lawyer
said
There might be several ways In which the
operating company could FIX its signs to comply
exactly with the much discussed clause in the
contract, and because OF the contract. In such
case the Rapid Transit Commission would
have rather poor chance in the courts.