New-York tribune., 1910-01-05
BILL FOR STATION
is CITY LIABLE?
Grade Crossing Tie1cs of Cor
poroti0n Counsel attacked

government. said that the Office OF Cor
poratiOn Counsel should be abolished be-
cause, under the legal opinions given by
that office which are binding upon all city
officials the city always got the worst
Of H.
The iconoclastie views of the former Con
troller with regard TO this important pub
lie Office are the result of many serious
differences of opinion between the office of
the Controller and that of the Corporation
Counsel witi regard TO the city's legal
status in disputes over the carrying out
Of important public works
In the matter Of responsibility for the
failure of the greensboro Bridge to come
up TO contract requirements the Corpora
ton Counsers Office sided with the con-
tractor while the Controllers office insist
ed that responsibility for the defects rested
with the contractor. The Supreme Court
last week decided that there was grave
doubt, in spite of the opinion Of the Cor
poration Counsel. as 10 whether or not the
contractor was liable, and declared that
The question Of responsibility ought TO be
decided by the trial OF a taxpayers action
before the courts
In the matter of the elimination OF grade
crossings along the lines Of certain rail-
ways in The Borough OF Brooklyn there
Controllers office and the railway compa-
nies over the city's share OF the cost of the
work. defined by the act of the I.egts-
lature authorizing the Improvement in
which the Corporation COunseTs office sided
with the railway companies This Dispute
has also been taken TO the courts by one
Of the railway cOmpanie applying for
niandamus order TO compel payment of
s2Z5.eoo held to be due by the city for its
share OF the cost OF the work which for
mer Controiier Metz refused to pay.
The opinions OF the Corporation Counsel.s
office. which, it was asserted. did not PRO
iect the city's interests. were published in
yesterdays Tribune
WHAT CORRESPONDENCE SHOWS.
The correspondence shows that the atten-
tion Of the Corporation CounseTs office was
first called TO alleged evasion of the pro-
visions Of the act in June 1906 in conuec-
tiOn with the abolition OF grade crossings
along the, line OF the Brooklyn Heights
railway upon a payment certified to by the
Brooklyn Grade Crossing Commission as the
city's share OF elevating the railway com
pany's tracks and for the construction of a
station al Park Place. Brooklyn
The original station building al this place
was a frame affair, about 10 By 20 feet in
ing photograph. on the company's property
nearest the northbound tracks. The plat
forms were partly of plank and partly a
cinder path raised about ten inches above
The top OF the rails. The tracks were cinder
bsllasted and We're separated by a picket
fence making the station facilities avail
able only 10 passengers using the trains on
the norThbound tracks. During rush hours
passengers were compelled 10 buy their
tickets on the trains.
There were no platform shelters. and the
only canopy the station possessed was the
small wooden affair over the small station
house door. The old station house building
MAS afteTward used as a field office for en-
gineers engaged upon the work The char
scter and general insdequacy of station
facilities along this line of railway shortly
before the work of Improvement began
drew reproof from the State Railway Com
mission, with orders for immediate improve
ment
Incident te the abolition of the grade
crossing AT the Park Place station over
Prospect Place the space between the two
psirs OF. tracks was widened to permit of
The erection OF an island station. shown in
The accompanying photograph, which now
SERVES passengers for both north and south
bound trains The new tracks have been
ballasted with broken stone instead of Gin
ders
The station building and platforms cover
so linear feet in the centre between the
tracks. and cost. with foundations, toilea
accommodate tions and interior fittings, about
s. 0l3, of which only about s2,44 was made
4 charge against the railway company for
The station building. while about s5.56S was
made Joint charge one-half against the
nd. -iaalF Or
the concrete station platform, the covering
canopy and the COST OF laying stone ballast
instead of cinders.
In calling the attention of the Controller
10 these facts the Finance Department
engineers quoted the wording of the act
which says that the cost of construction
of all station buildings. sidings other than
those existing the date of the commence
ment OF the improvement and other better
mcnts 10 the railways hereinafter made,
whether provided for in this act not,
shall be borne by the said railway COM
panies, of them respectively, upon
their respective roads. and shall not be in
cluded IN the estimate to be made by the
commission OF the proposed Improvements
herein authorized"
The report recommended that payment OF
$3.50. claimed as the city's share for the
cost OF the erection Of this station. with its
platform, be withheld.
The Controller sought the opinion of the
Corporation Counsers Office as to whether
the amount claimed by the railway COM
any in this connection was proper
charge, but apparently received no reply,
for the amount later was paid by the city.
TIE second protest made by the Control
ier's department against the basis upon
which the city was being assessed for its
share OF this grade crossing elimination
work, under opinions of the Corporation
Counsel was based upon a report OF the
engineers Of the Finance Department made
on January q. 1857.
In this report the Controllers attention
vas called TO the fact that in the work
then in progress along the lines of the
Long Island and the Brooklyn Heights
railways one-haIf Of the cost Of which was
being assessed against the city under the
authorizing law. changes or grade and ex-
tensions Of facilities were being provided
for that could. not have been undertaken
without considerable expense by the rail-
way companies had their tracks remained
IN their former position unchanged as 10
grade By legal enactment, and that this
was being done Notwithstanding a pro-
vision IN the law excluding the cost OF all
betterments whether provided for in the
act or not. from being made charge
against the city.