New-York tribune., 1908-08-29
MIR. JOLINE'S OPINION
Receiuers' Objection TO T. $. C's
Order Based on CounseFs Adtace.

From the testimony of Adrian H Joline one
of the receivers Of the Metropolitan Street Kali
way Company before the Public Service Conn
mission yesterday II would seem that tne re-
cevers are not absolutely sure that the law CIV
Ing the commission the power TO make joint fa.es
and TO compel the giving of transfers between
two carriers is unconstitutional When pressea
for his opinion the matter by George =
Coleman. counsel for the commission, MY Iohhe
said the Public Service commissions Law did not
give commission the power to make JOINT
rates but he said the 'objecton'-not the pro
test''-of the receivers to the commissions order
had been based upon the advice of counsel So
receivers Mr.. Robinson and himself had fcit IL
property. TO record their objection MI Joline
explained however. that the statement question
ing the power of the commission WAS presented
I'm factious spirit but what they thought
wa. their duty 1--WE are advised, said Mr.
Joline that the commission has no power to
establish through routes joint rates Perhaps
may never carry the matter further, put we
wish 10 keep the record straight
Yesterday the first time that either of the
receivers had presented himself hearing af-
fecting their lines held by the commission Oren
Root general manager of the Metropolitan sys-
tenn. also there. Albert G. Mtlbank-
of Masten & Nichols. counsel for the receivers.
For the Central Park, North & East River Rail
road Company there present A. II. Wander
poeI, of counsel. Among the interested listeners
Transit Company and representative OF me
Morton Trust Company of which Thomas r
Ryan is vice-president Douglas Robinson, the
other receiver. not on hand.
AS he not railroad expert. Mr Jolns
couldn't say how long it would take to get the
figures of valuation of property, operating ex-
penses ETC. which would enable the receivers To
Say what fair rate would be. However. when
the Central C'rosstown Railroad Company heard
that its road was to be dropped from the Metro
politan system and made offer 10 the re-
ceivers they were reasonably certain that n sum
cient profit would be made 20 warrant them IN
holding on 10 the line Commissioner Eustls
wanted 70 know why such Information in regard
to the Central Park could not have bean obtained
in time to save public great Inconvenience
hut Mr. Joina said the proposition came from
the Central Crosstovn. whereas the Central Park
company did nothing Taking the public into
consideration Mir Maltbe wanted to know IL
tentative proposition could not have henn made
TO the Central Park company by the receivers TO
keep its lines in the system
Tentative propositions by receivers danger
ous,' said Nr, Joline-
you think that owed something
TO the pubc?" asked Commissioner Matbe-
Certainly the reply, but considered
our duty the Court which appointed US reeeiv-
er6 before that to the public
Doesn't the Court have duty TO the pub
Ifc7'' suggested Commissioner Eurtis.
THAT question may properly be addressed to the
Court JolIne answered
% questions of Mr.. Maltbe Mr.. Joine said he
thought II the duty OF the receivers TO keep the
road in reasonable and proper condition for op-
Grafton before any dividends, but he objected 10
the term first class"