New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-05-20
Advantages of McClellandWalker Re-
moval Bill as a Full Enabling Act.

To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: In defence Of his work the author
| Of the McManus- Boylan death avenue
| bill has made comparisons so unfair to the
McC'lelland- Walker bill for readjustment OF
| the New York Centrars West Side tracks
and their removal from the surface OF
streets that I note for information OF your
| readers:
In addition to conditional repeal or the
| Centrals charter. so far as 1t permits
tracks at grade I'm Manhattan. the Nc
| Manus- Boylan bill empowers the city, be-
| fore November next TO agree with the
Central for relocation of its tracks in the
city, "but off the surface Of any OF its
streets and avenues and that pending
the fuhlment" of such agreement, the
| continued use Of the surface of said streets
| and avenues by said company shall
| he lawful"
AS is well known, actual relocation must
he had under the railroad law, the agree
| ment thus permitted simply adding the
! needed consent of the city. Also, that re
Icca ton only fixes a new route leaving
the property therefor still to be acquired
So far. therefore. is the McManus- Boylan
il provides only for the city's consent TO
| re location of the route with express pro-
vision that the railroad may continue to
| Use the street surface as now until, in ac-
cord with such agreement. it shall have
relocated it's route under the railroad law
acquired by condemnation or otherwise
such property and rights as Is required for
it's new right of way. and completed the
construction necessary-involving indefinite
delay and later enabling legislation for
the city's part in providing Ito be paid
foe by the railroad the property and ease
ments required.
The McCleland- Walker bill is a full en-
arng AIT, covering every feature that can
he anticipated and permitting the city at
once TO agree both as to route and as to
the terms on which it will grant or receive
property or rights needed or surrendered by
the railroad
So far as concerns perpetuities: Under
the state constitution. the railroad law and
the McManus- Boylan bill. II enacted. re-
location is permitted in perpetuity Of it's
whole line i'm this city anywhere between
Spuyten Duyvil and St Johns Park, or.
indeed, TO anywhere I'm the greater city
the company may locate its terminal with
the consequent duty Of tho city to grant
and the right of the company TO condemn
such lands. lands under water and rights
in streets parks, etc, as may be needed to
effectuate such relocation, and not merely
for main but all needed side and connect
ing tracks. as well as stations and freight
and other terminals, etc BY the McClel-
land Walker bill relocation is forbidden
except within narrow limits. and perpetuty
prohibited, except that ITO straighten, re-
locate or widen the present right of way
OF said railroad for it's main tracks be-
tween the north line Of the city and West
S0th street in Manhattan. or to straighten
or relocate without widening" such right
~ way between West 3Oth street and
Beach street, such grant may be in per-
petuity or such shorter term and for sixty
feet or such less width as the said board
Cof Estimate and ApportionmenD shall GER
tfy to he required in the public interest
for the use of said railroad
II is true that the McManus- Boylan act
does not authorize much that might be
done under the McClelland- Walker bill.
That is it's vital fault. II stops short of ac-
complishing anything. RI enacted and the
Central did It's best to cooperate instead
Of ltigate the conditional repeal OF its
charter the city and the road could go no
further than TO agree on a new route and
then wait for enabling legislation to provide
for the physical and property adjustments
by which II could occupy and use such
new route. The McCIelland- Walker bill IN
cludes now the enabling legislation re-
qrired. AS TO this: It's critic misrepre-
sents II both in his suggestion of what IL
contemplates and the inference he leaves
that I'm this respect the McManus- Boylan
bill Is better guarded than is the McCTel-
land Walker blll-the fact being that the
McMsnus- Boylan' bill imposes no limita-
ton on the perpetmties. parks or water
front that may be pre-empted by the rail-
read under the relocation CONTEMPLATED.
while the McCleland- Walker bill. dictat-
ing no grant by the city, narrowly limits
the extent to which the city can even con
slider concessions 10 the railroad, whether AZ
II route. grants or rights
JOHN DE WITT WARNER
New York. May 10, 1911.