New-York tribune., 1906-08-14

ported what appeared 10 ne good ah'h"ii'ss N
the Brooklyn Rapid Transit had also retained sN
covernor Frank & Black in its fight against a.
cheaper fare Mr. Black is out Of town. alla no one
at HIS Office would talk about the report ou' 's ~
appearance among the companys eounsel &C.,
occasion great surprise. A fe" haoh'ns ~ 'eo ...
Black was retained by bOndholders IN the cOi"p"'lS
I'm case which affected the validity of certain
franchises Although he did not appear IN person
ia the case he drafted the briefs submitted
The statement was prepared by ex-Judse Hateh'
OF the Appellate Division. In part 1t foiiows
The recent decision by Justice GaynOr in the
MacFarIane case has precipitated a serious
controversy in which Is involved the legal right OK
i iocent fare to coney Island This question was
not involved in the matter which was ot;nD oetSle
presented by the papers IN that proceeMding M was
ing TO pay the IO-cent fare 10 Coney Island. de-
termination of this question did not involve tns
charge " '''e
There seems to be no law which makes the re-
fusal 20 pay railroad fare crime. ana lt ns
crime was committed in refusing 70 pay. tnen: % OF
ne was entitled 10 his discharge Such was the az
titude OF the railroad company on the return OF the
compshy was that tp there m had IN fact been
T oy @ s ba direction y or any Sf WAS s ggSdr arrest
counsel for the company joined In asking that ne ne
which called for a determination by the court of
the legality Of the 1Ocent fare TO Coney Island anu
None Of the franchises and charters of the va
papers. and the facts upon which 70 base the de-
1G-cent fare not before the court; conse-
Quently the opinion delivered by Nj; Justice Gay
cent fare was outside OF any issue before him for
fbeIo3e dma n@t mPS brdDe ne Dor does
IN the slightest initiate against or AFFECT the prior
instance least supp9lteG by the learned
justice himself MeNHlty agt the Brooklyn Heights
company not party TO the MacFaTland J., case, tS
writ the facts which establish it's rights 20 10
cent fare. and review by appeal the opinion
Assuming ho xever. that the question had been
before Mr.. Justice Gaynor and that he was autnTf or
question we think his decision is not sound law
subject. -. .
late Division 1872 This question was squarey @ anu
authoritativey decided The question therein Pre- Se
l0ceat fare TO Coney isaqd ana tne Geied that
the right to make such charge was authorized Oy
law 49,. .,.-o, .to Ground that
as the franchise Of RGr9n Tr se roa1 W
formerly steam railroad. the right accrued there
under to the company TO charge this rate OF rare.
peste ais 4ec piVsion of the Second department No
appeal was taken therefrOm and it remains the law
Mr. Justice Gaynor has conceded its binding, eff
avoid it's % operative force BY the assertion that the
recent decisions OF the Court OF ApPeais are . i
and therefore the latter must be regarded as
with ali Difference to the CONCLUSION thus reached
by the learned justice. l am impelled 70 register
my dissent from such conclusion. The cases relied
upon by him Griffin agt 1nterurban street
Railway Company, 179 New York ass, and OReily
agt. Brooklyn Heights Railroad Company, 179 New
The Griffin case involved the construction of Sec
ton 104 of the Railroad law relating to the giving
of transfers. The railroads there the subject or
consideration were street surface railroads in the
Borough of Manhattan organized under various
laws as street surface railroad corporations Not
of them had ever been a steam railroad com
pany. No question was presented in either the
Griffin or OReV case involving the construction
the right upon the Brooklyn Heights Railroad Com
pany to charge 10-cent fare the old steam
railroad lines running to Coney Island nor was
Section l01 the subject of consideration in either
case
II we assume the present question is governed by
the provisions of section lO4 Of the railroad law,
the result is not different. Among other things,
section lOi provided Every such corporation shall
portion thereof any passenger desiring make one
continuous trip between such points for single
fare, not higher than the fare lawfully chargeabe
by either of such corporations for an adult pas
lyn Heights Railroad Company 10 charge the
highest of fare that could have been charged
under the charter of Of the railroads operated
by il to Coney Island
form a part of such system. are authorized 70
charge for the carriage of passengers cents a
mile. The steam railroad lines involved represent
mileage which, at the cent rate. would exceed the
1O to which the learned justice adverted authority
is invested in the railroad company 10 charge the
rate of fare which il now demands.
1t is plainly evident that the law as II now stands
authorized the 10 charge and resistance TO Its
payment is not sanctioned by law.