The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-04-29
Says the Pennsylvania R. R.
Threatened Him,
VETOES FRANCHISE BILL.
Railroads Men, He Declares, Told
Him They'd Hold Legislature.


vetoed It-Time Has Come, He Thinks.
10 show the Corporation That II Cam
not Control New York as Il Controls
Pennsylvania and New Jersey-Pubnc
Duty 10 Resist such "InsOlence"
--DIsclaIms Any Desire to Stir Up
Feeling Against the Corporations.
Mayor Mcclellan vetoed yesterday the
TN depriving the Aldermen Of all power
over granting franchises. In an accom-
panving memorandum the Mayor, after re-
viewing the legal reasons against the bill,
uses plain language about the influence
Of the Pennsylvania Railroad over legisla-
ton and says that it's representatives told
him that the Legislature would not be
permitted" TO adjourn until the bills were
passed over his veto
This part Of the memorandum reads:
Having stated these substantial reasons
Inherent in the propositions presented
! now offer a more important one, although
Il arises from an incident In the history Of
this legislation.
THE chief cause alleged for the action
Of the Legislature Is the hardness Of the
Board Of Aldermen to act on the apploa-
ton Of the New York Connecting Railway
Company for franchise to operate road
through portions Of the city. The New
York Connecting Railway Company is said
20 be controlled by the Pennsylvania Rail
road Company, and this corporation is the
promoter OF the agitation to deprive the
Board OF Aldermen OF this power over the
granting Of franchises.
Il have nothing to do with the merits
Of the dispute between them, and my at
titude would. under the circumstances,
be unchanged no matter on whose side the
merits were.
THE Pennsylvania Railroad Company
hut few yean ago acquired a foothold
in this city. but Il seems determined to
exercise its power over public ofhciah here,
Is It haa elseuhSua. q sllssalready nado
plain TO me its ability to crush all opposi-
ton to its plans
Its represent tives have come to me
in the Mayors ONCE to advise me that II
did not accept these measures they would
nevertheless be passed over my veto.
was urged, should l decide to reject the
bills. to do 80 promptly, 20 as not to need
lessly prolong the session OF the Legislature,
which would not be permitted to adjourn
until the bills were repassed.
This corporation, which has 30 long
dominated the States Of Pennsylvania
land New jersey, should be taught that it
cannot grasp the government Of New York
OF take away OF transfer power from public
bodies who. whether for good OF bad
motives, fail to do it's bidding. Resistance
- Nhta srr,NtpA Ia a Rnhli0
duty OF the greatest Importance.
Il have no desire to infame any prejudice
against corporations as such. They have
their rightful purposes. But / believe
that unless such manifest at ions Of insolence
are rebuked the evils they may engender
will imperil the peace and security Of our
government
In beginning his message, the Mayor
says that the only argument advanced In
favor OF the bills was that the Aldermen
had committed an abuse Of power in failing
10 act with sufficient promptness on certain
railway franchise applications. On this
point the Mayor says:
The proposed amendments are designed
either on the theory that such an abuse
Of power could not be committed by the
Board Of Estimate and Apportionment or
as a punishment to the Board Of Aldermen
for its alleged remissness.
The Board Of Estimate an Apportion-
ment IL granted this power Is capable Of
abusing it, and being composed Of fewer
men could do so probably with greater
ease 80 that the argument based on the
abuse Of power is clearly illogical, and
there is no assurance that much will be
gained by the change.
III the amendments are proposed as a
punishment OF the Board OF Aldermen,
the same power may be held in reserve
for the chastisement Of the Board OF Esu
mate il il fails to use its authority as ma y
lie thought proper, and 40 the influences
which can induce and control legislation
could continue TO shift these functions
from one set Of officers or boards TO an
other until one could he found compla cent
enough 10 suit.
Assuming that the Board Of Aldermen
may be at fault, the remedy attempted
Is not the proper one, Is inconsistent with
our governmental theory and injurious
to public interests.
The people have the power 10 replace
unfaithful public servants with faithful
ones To imply that this method Of re-
dress is Intellectual is TO doubt the efficiency
for purposes OF government OF a system
furthermore, the argument drawn from
on abuse Of power could be urged will
equal force against form Of government
and every public officer from the Presiden
down
lam no apologist for any Board Of Alder
men, past OF present, and what say Il
based on the common sense Of the situa
ton.
The Board Of Aldermen under varioul
names has been a continuous body In ON
city system from a time long before VI
had State government. While / an
quite clear that It's fame has not Away
been oreditable 20 itself or 10 the city, not
withstanding this fact on every revisior
OF our Charter. the revisors, always mel
Of exceptional standing and ability, hav
preserved the body with the importan
function Of which this legislation sch
10 deprive 1t. II II becomes Advisable 4
>