Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1916-05-22
SUIT BEGUN TO ENJOHN
CITY FROM PURCHASING
GREENWICH TERMINALS
Taxpayers Litigation Started to
Halt Abandonment of Rail-
way Property on Della
ware River
CALL CONTRACT INVALID

A taxpayers suit attacking the legality
| Of the ordinance and contract providing
| for the abandonment of the Greenwich
railway terminals, on the Delaware River,
and their purchase by the city for upward
of s5,0OO,0O0 was filed in Common Pleas
| Court No. by Mary ]. b. Chew the Del
| aware River Real Estate Company and
other property owners in the 39th Ward
The Mayor and other city officials and
the Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington
Railroad, the Pennsylvania Railroad, the
Schuylkill River East Side Railroad, the
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad and the Belt
Line are named as defendants in the suit,
which seeks to enjoin the defendants from
proceeding with the condemnation proceed
ings of the 537 acres involved or from ex-
pending any money on the project. A total
cost o S10,000,000 will result IL the project
is carried out, the bill states
In the petition it is explained that on
February IA, 1914, an ordinance was passed
by Councils authorizing the execution of
the contract, which was made on March 90,
providing that the Greenwich terminals be
dismantled and abandoned, and that the city
purchase from the company the real estate,
piers and other appurtenances of the ter
minals, located between the east line of
Delaware avenue and the pier head line
and between the property line of the Pennsy
and its subsidiaries south of Bigler street.
1t is stated the contract provided that the
city Shall pay to the Pennsylvania Com
panes the appraised value of the heal es-
tate, based upon the purposes for which the
same is now used, and an additional sum
equivalent to the estimated cost of re-
placing the piers and other appurtenances
of the terminals, etc"
PROVISIONS OF CONTRACT.
The bill says no appropriation has ever
been made by Councils and no ordinance |
passed defining the character and extent of |
the treatment of the property after II should |
be SO acquired for municipal purposes.
In general, the contract contemplates the |
destruction of the existing terminals, pay
ment in full for the same by the city as |
going-concern values, the erection for the
railroads of new terminal facilities at the
sole cost of the city, including the cost of |
necessary dredging, and the purchase or
condemnation of a vast area of land lying
to the south of the present terminals.
CALLED EXCESSIVE
The total number of municipal piers pro.
posed by the plan is excessive for the next
25 years, and will constitute a burden on
teh taxpayers, 1t Is asserted. The land to
be condemned Is more than the railroads
need the petition states
1t is averred that the city hod no power
to enter into such an agreement. The con.
tract places an obligation upon the city
to expend approximately $4,000 900, al.
though, as required by law, the execution
Of the agreement was not preceded by an
estimate of the whole cost of the i'm.
provements.
The contract, If valid, would constitute
an increase of the municipal indebtedness in
excess of per cent, without a vote of the
people, as required by the Constitution, and
would cause the debt of the city to exceed
pperp cent. of the assessed valuation of
taxable property.
In conclusion. the bill states that the
city is without ready money to carry out
Its part of the contract, and is about to
borrow S100o0,000 for the purpose of maxi
ng the payments necessary under the agree
nent
The complainants in the suit are Mary
T. b. Chew. Martha NJ. Brown. Edward
Hopes, Joseph A. Janney. Jr., Joseph A.
stenmetz. Charles C. Harrison, Andrew
!. Toland and the Delaware River Real Es-
ate Company. a corporation.