New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1906-02-15
AGAINST ELSBERG BILL.
belmont Interests Nay Not Bid on
Sub7odys If 1t Becomes Lac.

The Belmont-Ryan interests. in control of all
the traction interests in Manhattan and The
Bronx, say that they will not bid for any of the
new subways if the Elsberg bill becomes a law
This decision by Messrs. Belmont and Ryan be-
came known in Wall Street yesterday and was
verified last night by one of Mr.. Belmonts lieu
tenants, who said:
There will be nothing particularly attractive
from financial point of view in the building Of
further subways in this city. The Rapid Transit
Commission is fully aware of the earning power
of the Belmont subway. and is disposed to make
hard terms for future tunnel builders and oper-
ators: The next subway will reduce itself by
the time 1t has been running year to per
cent earning proposition. and that will be the
iuI size OF IT. 1t Is all right and proper for the
reformers to demand that the city build its sub
ways. and that is what it will have to do if the
Esberg bill becomes a law.
Mr.. Belmont and his friends do not believe
that the Elsberg bill will become a law. They
believe that more subways. with a guaranteed
scent fare, built Immediately by private capt.
tai, will be more attractive proposition to the
Rapid Transit Commission than the experiment
OF having the city build a subway system, with
the strong probability that IT will take two
years TO get through the necessary conStitu-
tonal amendment, and that the system cannot
be built so as TO guarantee ride for less than
cents.
The decision of the Belmont people to refrain
from bidding if the Elsberg bill passes is arous-
ing great interest in the outlying districts. 1t
was learned yesterday that Cord Meyer, who is
heavily interested in real estate in Queens, and
James l. Wells, similarly engaged in The
Bronx, are getting together delegations of tax
payers who will go TO Albany and argue against
the Elsberg bill. They take the ground that
there will be a great delay if the city under
takes TO build subways, and that it will cost so
much more than If built by private enterprise
that nothing less than a scent fare can be
charged. and that in the end the traveller will
he ha++ at, 5oIax a., @J,o Of
building the road will greatly retard the de-
veIopment of The Bronx and Queens.
Incorporation Counsel Rives, counsel to the
Rapid Transit Commission. thinks it will be
mistake to compel the Rapid Transit Commits
sion to separate construction from operation in
the letting of future subway contracts Law
renee WELLER secretary of the City Club, last
night sent to Senator White. chairman of the
Senate Cities Committee, letter in which he
says:
I inclose a substitute bill. which I trust
OF the present Elsberg bill The situation
is a totally different from that of pre-
vtous years. In past years the persons ia
voring the EIsberg measure have claimed that
it was perrnssive bill and that 1T simply per-
United the Rapid Transit Commission to sep
arate contracts for construction from operation,
and to have municipality operated road in case
they could not secure satisfactory bids from
private bidders, the arguments for this latter
that the Rapid Transit Commission should have
some such means Of compelling satisfactory
bids.
Now, however, the same persons who have in
past years advocated the Elsberg bill these
grounds state that the Elsberg bill is not per-
missive, but mandatory, and that what they are
seeking to accomplish is to compel the Rapid
Transit Commission 10 let ali contracts for con-
structiOn and operation separately and to pro-
hibit the commission from letting any contract
jointly. These gentlemen even go SO far as TO
say (as did Senator Ford at the hearing before
n n b9 W thew
wish to accomplish is to compel the city to build
a subway at its own expense equip it at its own
expense, and then and not until then, advertise
for bids for its operation.
That is. il is the intention Of the persons who
at the present time actively urging the pas
sage of the Elsberg bill in it's present form to
compel the municipal operation Of all new sub
ways.
Without expressing any opinion as to the
merits or dement's of municipal operation, we
submit that important step should not be
made possible by any process of indirection.
If that is the intention of the persons urging the
Elsberg bin they should amend the bill as
to make this perfectly plain to the community
and should leave no doubt as to what they do
intend.
What we are contending for is the principle
that the Rapid Transit Commission should have
the power to let contracts for construction,
equipment and operation, either separately or
jointly, in such way as in their judgment will
prove to be to the best interests Of the city.
The substitute bill which accompanies this let
ter and which we urge upon your favorable
consideration does that in plain. unequivocal
language, whose meaning cannot be mistaken
It also does more-it changes the term of future
subway contracts from the present maximum or
fifty years so to make all future contracts
terminate at a time not later than the termina-
ton Of the present contract, viz, October p,
1854 although the Rapid Transit Commission Is
given power, under this bill, TO make contracts
for d less term.