New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1909-03-06
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
SUBWAY CONSTRUCTION.
The Bankers Committee and the Prouoa.a
Constitutional Amendment.

To the Editor of The Tribune
Sir: In your editorial in to-days issue md.
title Private Capitals Terms you state that =
committee Of the eminent bankers IN the c,.
has pronounced feasible. Safe and sound" the ~
posed constitutional amendment Is this sn-i-o,-
accurate?
The Mayors advisory COMMITTEES PROFESSIONALS
(and apparently reluctantly approved the amend
ment conditioned absolutely on the city havino .
guarantee that the property acquired constrle+
ed with the proceeds of the bonds so excluded shan
, be self-sUpportlng'
VIII you state from what source such a g7Iara,-
tee to the city be had?
Must It not be assumed that the bankers com,
mittee meant that funds should be expended i,
rapid transit construction without concdent lease
for equipment and operation at a rental sufHcient
to pay the interest and sinking fund instruments?
VIII you state if you have any information ~
reasonable grounds to affirm that. under the exist
ing provisions OF the rapid transit law, any one
can be found lease municipality constructed
subway on those terms?
If not. would not the availability OF such funds
under this provision OF the advisory committees
opinion have to lie unused until the suggested guar
antee could be had2
If that opinion was disregarded and a subway
route constructed. and no one found equip and
operate it on self-supportng terms. would pub
lie opinion inevitably compel equipment and opera
ton of II by the city,
Do you favor municipal operation well al
ownership of subway routes?
You misQuOte from the report OF the COMMITTEES
of the Chamber of Commerce in stating that a 10
cent fare is suggested. The suggestion was that
some increased fare might be necessary on express
trains maintaining a minimum average speed An
illustration of what additional expense 1o-cent
fare would be given as the simplest compu-
tation but no specific rate OF increase was includ
ed in the suggestion. II the city constructs and
equps the routes but IS unable to obtain an operator
10 assume the interest and sinking fund payments
10 make them seIf-supporting. If the city operat
ed them at a loss how would the deficit be mads
up?
Could IT be provided for in any way other than
from the proceeds Of general taxation:
If II IS generally admitted that private opera
ton is likely 10 be more economical than municipal
operation would not the deficit. If any. that ths
city might nave to make I'D be less under private
operation than under municipal operation. or II thu
city built and equipped and leased for operation
only on terms below interest and amortization IN
stalments would it not in effect be substdizng the
operator?
As a clear public understanding Of these matters
Is desirable # might be of advantage If you would
state YOUR views in answer to these propositions
New York. March T. 1900 d E BONNER
rIf the writer will read the opinion Of the
Mayors advisory committee ne will find It IS
not conditional Having approved the consti-
tutionaI amendment. the report says 1t IS the
committees further opinion" that legislation.
which could only he passed subsequent TO It's
adoption, should require a guarantee such as
the writer refers 10. Thus this remark is not
a condition, but an additional recommendations
The existing rapid transit law should be 50
amended that operating companies would bs
ready to lease municipality constructed subUals
The Tribune does not favor municipal operation
II is true that the Chamber Of Commerce COM
mittee's report is open to the construction Of
favoring a 15-cent or a 2O-cent fare or any
other terms that capital might exact Of the city
If left entirely at It's mercy. but We do not think
that will strengthen it in the minds of average
Citizens-Ed-I