New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-08-30
A Reply to the Mayor.

sioners Of the city of New York .,,o
An attempt is being made TO pass o n,,
| proposed charter I'm its present FORM uIVH
the ground of an alleged oDScuIltN III Wv
rapid transit act and the charter III ig
spect to the power OF the Mayor M - =.
| no cbscuritV Whatever confusion tllci
il arises from a refusal to see the PLAIN
distinction between a constitutional coiiseu'
similar i'm scope to those gwen ny T WOoe
sands of property owners aiohs , ond
Of rapid transit railroads. 10 Ioules a,l
general plans "A right of approval over CON
tracts and franchises. t.ioe
Prior To 1907 the municipal authorizes ',,
had no control whatever over rapld u"IoI
contracts their sole voice being INC S%'nvv
as a property owner, J. e., WhelnTi ~!
would consent to routes ana genera Irfnre
The legislation TO which the Mayor ~,
WAS passed in 1905 for the purpose VI "a. an,
ing away from the Board OF Aldclilcl ny
right to pass on routes ana genera P' a.
The quotation that the Mayor MAKES We as
10 make clear that routes ana Ia transit
Heretofore adopted by the Kappa cdrc ",,,,
! Eoard and awaiting action by the NoIlli' he
Council should be acted upon, n99' 'p,sti-
Common Council hut by the h,odlu hat the
mate II was not until year later tiidr o zee,
n1unicip4I authorities were given any WIZ
IN the making Of contracts
E. M. Shepard Drew Provisions
The Mayor states that the RAPID tbat the
az - ,nie io,Ss are none too scientlhc'
while tuis NAV be true OF DINER sTDtdr a.
the RAND Transit act and tne -, rcsnact
! do nor aDnIs TO those sections III iCHPS'O
w e. oction of the local authorities on
routes and general plans, FOR these PIo,
rieions both in the Rapid Transit act anu
ir the charter. are commandments ~
other and were both drawn hy an achIlo"i-
edged master. Edward NJ. Shepard.
! Furthermore, this point has aireadN peen
decided by the courts IN that II Wa p,It
| of the issues distinctly raised IN the recent
| case of the Admiral Realty company
against Gaynor ct al. in which Judge For9
decided in favor OF the city. Inc plaIll'il
contended there that the Bradley contracts
were illegal because the Mayor had not ap-
proved them. Judge Ford decided that me
contracts were legal, and did not deem II
The Mayor states that he is not given any
veto over the actions Of the Bcard OF
Estimate in regard 10 routes ana Seie eI a.
plans. for the simple reason mat the Il .a,
Ter does not come to the Board or tSlliiIdte
until the Mayor has first approved II. dng
Mayor cannot point 10 single route di.G
! general plan where such procedure ne
/ been followed on the contrary, IN ever
case The route has first been passed D!
| the Board of Estimate ana theh s"o'''''N
J to the Mayor. ,,,.~ .al,,
II is surprising to hear the MAYOR laiS
/ of the PENNSYLVANIA and McAdoo ram Vd"S
/ Gain. '.tI,iif undar the charter These
were built under the Rapid Iransit az ~,
! being authorized by ceruncates EIdHleu ~
the former Rapid transit iGd1u ta Ken nv
/ any MAYOR on these certificates OUTSIDE OF
| his vote as a member Of the Board OF fsu-
| mate was i'm giving his consent 10 the route
and general plan precisely the same as
would be the case in municipality con-
| struCtCd subway.
/ In his statement Mr.. Binkerd. of the city
! club. saws the history Of rapid transit
! legislation makes clear the fact that the
] MAYORS separate and additional consent Is
not and never has been necessary to the
approval Of franchises and contract under
the rapid transit act. He adds:
The so-caIled Gaynor charter, March 81,
1o11 did not find the rapid transit act am
llguOuS as TO the Mayor power. II even
went further. and struck OUT llt IVdudiv
mon. for the Mayors separate assent anu
constituted the Board Of Estimate the
sole power. in behalf Of the city, 10 con
sent TO or contract for the use OF puplD
property. or any portion thereon OF cd9e
mcnt therein, for any purpose LOT W. - ~ a
franchise may be granted. tGaNhor chdr-
ter, section l76. page o. lines 80. . ..-..
! In was only after the Board Of Estimate
! had disagreed with the Mayor on the dis
rosition of rauid transit matters tndt these
alleged powers were uncarthed, tand IL pe-
| came necessary TO clear up alleged am
/ rieuitiee i'm the rapid transit act. .
The decision Of rapid transit matters Is
one of the most important pohry-determ-
/ lining functions Of the city EoVernihe H.
and can only properly ne VeSITTu ~ 'i ,o
| hoard of directors Of the city. To give 10
/ the NIavor the power Of insuperabie dlSseht
| is in effect. the grant Of the power or
Paralysis. TO give this power now anu
| thus TO insure by legislative act the upset
| Of the decision Of the city, arrived AT by
! long and earnest study and dlScusSloh'
would make this charter one OF the most
fragrant anti-home rule ripper DIS IN leg
/ islatve history
Facts Justify Public Warning.
In a statement issued by the Bureau Of
Municipal Research last night, it is said
two large facts stand out in the Mayor $
| letter of Monday that justify public warn
ing. Specifying. the statement reads;
/ First-The Mayor either does not know or
/ is willing to misrepTeSent facts regarding
! recent improvements I'm the Controllers OIL
/ fee. A tabulauon OF an contracts ana open
market orders passed through that ONCE
| for twelve months showed that the average
| time required for payment has dropped from
| over twenty days to eight days. including
/ SUNDAYS and holidays Yet the Mayor inn
plies that claims are being held up Unrea-
sOuably by the Controller. In striking con-
! trast To the progress made I'm the Control
| lal'S office is the fact that in the Mayor g
! own departments no such progress has been
made i'm the last two years, and that less
| than half Of the bills are passed within
! thirty days
! II is not true and the Mayor knows that
/ 70 i- not true. that lobbyists have been sue
| ccS-ful i'm holding mp and I'm eNpediunS pay
ment of bills by the present Controller. IN
/ iuuuiry would without doubt show that the
! only persons who suggested taking away
] the Controllers power To protect the public
are contractors and LOBBYISTS who are un-
able 10 secure favors from the Controllers
I Office.
! SecOni-Now York City'S present Mayor
! does not believe i'm the removal of elective
! officials except when they are caught with
/ marked money on their persons. He would
/ undo the removal Of Ahearn and Haffen
| just rs he has DELAYED If not prevented the
| removal o. GreSSer lie specifically OBJ
| iects 10 removal for gross incompetence.
| "alheit.' as Governor Hughes said per
| sonal dishonesty is not legally proved