New-York tribune., 1909-04-26
pRFATE CAPITAL.

IT, ,,aSs.e,o of tho amendments to the Eisberg
and rapid transit acts removes the preNaiei'
excuse for private capitals inactivity IN suh"a!
construction. If private capital is as reauE "'
some say to build subways. it Is now al lpeIlS
to hniId 1hem IF it is not we shall probably
soon hear that the new law is not sufnclel.IS
lfhernl-that the provision under which the c'ty
can purchase lines constructed by private eapl-
tai at the end of ten years. for example hiIS
individual enterprise from the field.
What the real attitude of private capital IS at
this time is very uncertain 1t doubtless depends
upon how profitable subway operation Is ana rs
10 that there is considerable doubt. When the
present subway was opened the public. observing
the course Of the InteTb0rOugh RAPID IfauS't
Companv's stock on the exchange concluded 'ia'
the new line was immensely profitable and that
the CITY had made bad bargan-an opinion
which had much 10 do with subsequent leglsa-
tfon and largely accounted for the confidence
that private capital would rush to supply the
city with new subways. The impression now Is
that The Dresent subway is only moderator!
profitable. an impression fostered by reports OF
the Public Service Commissions engineers
At present that commission has three offers
peuding which Il can consider under the amend
ed law-that of the Interbor0ugh company l"
extend lis system. that Of the Bradiey-GaHheE
Steers Comnanv for a new subway and that OF
road with a subway across town. If the In
terhorough offer IS fair example of the attitude
f private capital there is little hope that the
CITY will find adequate relief at the hands OF
private capital II will build subway only II
the city will give it perpetual franchIse TOT
two tracks Of elevated railway Even II lhat
snouId be done in this instance, ii is obviously
impossible that private capital should be at
tracted in the future ny any similar concession.
Moreover the Interborough proposes 10 bullu
only two-track subway and not TO extend IT,
like the present line 70 the unbuilt outskirts OF
the CITY: and by the time it could be finished
the new two-tracx extension Of the existing
system would be badly overcrOwded. In hrleI
then. if the Interborough's offer is 10 he taken
a. an indication of what private capital IS Will
ing 10 do Il will build subways provided val
liable perpetual franchises for other lines are
offered as an inducement, but only subways o1
medium length. offering such limited facilities
as 10 guarantee the operators from the start a
highly congested traffic
Tie Bradley -Gaffney-SteerS offer for the Lex
ington avenue line on the other hand. is much
more favorable. If private capital will really
do what this syndicate proposes 10 do, there
will be little occasion for the use of the citys
credit But the syndicates financial backing IS
unrevea led. all that IS known being its business
and political affiliations. Until more has been
disclosed the offer cannot be seriously regarded
as an indication of what the city may expect
from private capital that the law has been
reasonably modified. Nor does the offer of the
Wilgus company throw any light on the ques
tion. for Mr. WiIgus proposes 10 construct an
elevated road. with short connected subway
or two. Elevated railways are so much cheaper
10 build and 50 much more profitable to operate
that capitalists doubtless stand ready 10 put
them NJ.
II is 10 be hoped that the Bradley offer will
prove TO have the requisite financial support, or
that other favorable and seriously intended
offers viii come. that the law has been
charged for though The Tribune has fought for
the constitutional amendment. it would prefer
10 see subways built on fair terms without the
Use Of municipal credit. The city should he in
2 position 10 build subways if private capital IS
TapaciOuS. but il should not build them II private
capital offers reasonable terms.