New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1905-03-30
SUBWAY COMPETITION.

The nurnort of Mr. Belmont's statement COLI
corning the relations of his company to under
ground rapid transit seems to have peen nlsuh-
derstood in some quarters. MT. belniohC "oeo
not pretend that the money put INTO tne sup
way by himself and his associates was invested
under an agreement or belief that they were TO
control the whole business of suDsurIace Trans
portation in this city WHAT he mas dohe is u
cite the letter which Mr. Mcdonald sent to the
Rapid Transit Commission in july, 1SUz, oHer-
ing to construct the Brooklyn extension for
50 oo0 900 and giving the reasons why his com
panv was willing to pay the rest of the cost OF
that work out of its own resources. In that let
ter Mr. Mcdonald clearly said that ne wanted
not IAN official commitment, but "a reasonable
assurance that when the city was financially
able to do so it would undertake the construc-
ton of a subway down Broadway from 4Id-st.
TO 14th-st. 1t was not an express condition. but
it was perfectly frank statement of what was
wanted and perhaps expected, and it is only
fair to give it whatever weight properly belongs
10 it at the present time.
Mr.. Belmont, facing the prospect of stiff
competition with the New-York City Railway
Company for the franchises which the commls-
sion is about to bestow, now feels warranted IN
contending that, because of Mr.. Mcdonald
letter the commission is under a moral obliga-
ton TO carry out the plan therein referred to.
But the obligation is by no means so clear to
others as it is TO him. The resolution unanl-
mously adopted by the commission three days
after the receipt of that letter. accepting one
of the alternative offers which it contained,
made no alusion whatsoever TO Mr.. Mcdonald s
desire for "a reasonable assurance" concerning
future Broadway extension. The commission
did not commit itself directly or indirectly on
that subject That was the time for the Sub
way Construction Company, as it was then
called TO see to it that the moral obligation
was not overlooked in case 1t felt sensitive on
that score But it is a fact, we believe, that the
point was not raised. after the offer was ac-
cepted in July, 1902, and we do not remember
that it has ever been mentioned IN any of the
proposals and discussions of the last three years
until now. when Mr.. Belmont is opportunity re-
minded of his former associates letter.
Controller Grout. whose views on municipal
questions are not always edifying compressed
much common sense into his comment on the
report that the marlborough company would
not bid on Brooklyn subway franchises. Mr..
Belmont" said the Controller, will bid for
Brooklyn extensions if it is to his financial IN
'terest to do so, and he will not If the contrary
'fs true. He assuredly will not bite off his nose
''to spite his face. All we know now is that both
companies are willing to build subways at their
''own expense" That degree of knowledge,
which will probably be augmented before long,
is well worth possessing, inasmuch it sup
plies an agreeable assurance of sharp rivalry
and favorable terms to the city for new sub
way enterprises 1t is common belief that at
no very distant day all the transportation inter-
ests of the city will be combined under one man.
agement, but there is at present no evidence of
an understanding prejudicial to the public
among the prospective bidders for what the COM
mission has TO offer On the contrary, there is
every reason TO believe that, whatever may
happen hereafter, the successful applicant will
cheerfully consent to be bound by a contract
fairly representing the potential value of the
privileges which it secures.
The practical utility of the existing subway is
immense. AS educational agency 1t is also
a great success. The public is already able to
form fairly intelligent estimate Of what it is
worth TO those who enjoy the revenue that II
r1rodupes