New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-11-16
BUS LINE CALLED
MONOPOLY'S FOE
Counsel for Company Ask
ing Franchise Says Inter
borough Is Opponent.
TRAFFIC FAMINE"
PLEA RIDICULED
New Concern Needed to Relieve
Congestion In Districts Now
observed, Board Is Told.

The New York Motor Bus Company.
whose application for q franchise 70
operate new bus routes In the city has
been favorably reported by the fran
chise committee Of tho Board OF Est-
mate, had its innings yesterday at the
public hearing on the matter In City
Hall. At two previous hearings Will
lam D. Guthrie and James L. Quacken-
bush, counsel for the marlborough
Rapid Transit Company, and John NJ.
Bowers, representing the Third Avenus
Railway Company, vigorously ARGUED
against granting the franchise.
cambridge Colby, counsel for the
Motor Bus Company, dealt few well
directed blows at the contentious OF
the lawyers for the traction interests
that competition created by new bus
line would drive the surface lines
into bankruptcy again, threaten the
future profits Of the partnership be-
tween the city and the subway up
Grating companies and create men,
ace TO public safety.
Mr.. Colby declared that counsel f'r
the existing lines would have 1t a?-
pear as though there was a traffic
famine In this city, whereas passen-
gers were herded In conveyances. most
indecently."
both the marlborough and he
Third Avenue" said Mr.. Colby, warn
the city that if It countenances this
little bus operation, which at its ca
n1,t 4
the normal increase In the total pas
senger traffic of the city for one year
alone. the city will again throw the
surface lines into bankruptcy, as II
the city of New York were responsi-
bic for the recent bankruptcy o. the
surface lines. In other words, we are
told that the city, and not the owners
Of the pilfered and scandalous Tort
unes made out Of the criminal manipu-
lation Of the surface lines, Is respon-
sible for their receivership.
VIII Be Profitable to City.
"For 1917 the estimated PASSENGER
traffic IL 2.07S 100000. with 3S 600 90
surplus passengers TO accommodate
Yet the Interborough counsel would
have you believe that the city was
risking It's big dual subway invest
ment.
The bus operation will be profit
able to the city. Il will contribute
more traffic TO the existing lines than
il can possibly take away. What II
does take away will be worth more IN
the city than the same amount OF
travel on the existing lines. The bus
charges twice the fare and pays the
city the same percentage on gross 20
ceipts as the existing lines.
at Is said the bus will add TO con-
gestion in our streets. just the re-
verse Is the fact. The Public Service
Commissions reports show that the
bus is a prime means Of relieving con-
eestion. II carries forty-five passen-
gers and gives each seat. 1t taxes
no more space virtually than a taxlcab
or n private automobile.
"The opposition is dictated by the
Fifth Avenue Coach Company For
years Il has had an exclusive monopoly
upon twenty miles Of city streets.
"The Fifth Avenue Coach Company Is
the marlborough Railway Company
Five Of its nine directors are Inter
borough men, including Shonts HIM
self"
routes were not competitive with the
visiting surface and subway lines, but
that the purpose Of the Board OF Esti-
rnete had been skilfully worked out, TO
devise supplementary service that
will relieve the lack of local transpor-
tation in great populous districts now
wholly unserved.