Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1916-04-04

called attention to another part Of the
Lennon amendment that may prove disas-
trous to the final working out Of the
Taylor system.
The Lennon amendment, Il was shown,
makes n separate item for the provision
for the delivery loop, while the Taylor plan
combines the delivery loop with the Broad
street subway, making II impossible TO
construct the one without the other. The
Seger amendment. which was defeated by
the Finance Committee, combines the de-
livery loop with the Broad street subway
in accordance with the Taylor plan. The
Lennon nme ndment makes an entirely sep
arnte item Of the Broad street subway and
the delivery loop. Under the Lennon
amendment, " was pointed out by adj
vocntes Of the Taylor plan, the Broad
street subway could he built without the
delivery loop, which Is the backbone Of the
entire Taylor plan.
MAYOR MET MITTEN SECRETLY.
The adoption of the Lennon amendment
| yesterday came at the conclusion Of one
| of the stormiest sessions ever held in the
| Finance Committee rooms OF Councils.
| Mayor Smith and Transit Director Twin
/ ing were subjected to severe Erilling in
| the form Of insinuating questions from
| Select Councilman Seger. Of the Penrose
! faction, and Select Councilman Harry j.
| Trainer who recently deserted the Wares.
It was learned in the course of the in
| QUESTION that the Mayor and Transit Di-
| rector Twinins had held two secret confer
/ enCeS with Thomas II Mitten, president of
| the Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company,
| and a. L. Drum, consulting engineer for
/ the transit company But both the Mayor
| and the Director insisted that these meet.
| ings had had no influence upon the fran
ing Of the emasculated bobtail plan which
| was so overwhelmingly rcpudated at the
| Finance Committee meeting
Director Twtnng, during the cross
examination by the McNichol- Penros,
leaders said he guessed he had taker
| orders.
Another climax came when it was
| brought out that the keystone state Con
| structun Company. the MCNichol concerI
| which holds the contract for the worl
| under city Hall is bonded through tn,
Thomas B. Smith Company. from which
| however, the Mayor said he had with
drawn before the company bonded tn,
McNichol firm.
The hands Of the political factions wer,
seen at the meeting, when Mr.. Lennon an
| tiCipated Mr. Segnr and introduced ~
amendment providing what were supposed
to be the same things Mr.. Seger had an
rounCed he would insist upon. Not to b,
utdonc Mr.. Seger raised the amount %
is amendment from S50,O0O.OOO to $50,
before he introduced it. The Len
- on amendment was for $57.1O0.0O0.
The major points of difference betweel
" the Lennon and Segcr amendments are;
The Scger amendment provided for al
item of $G0,00O,00O for transit under tn
Lennon amendment the item is $57l00,O ,O0C
The Segcr amendment, like the Taylo
plan, provided for II high-speed line acros
the 35th Ward to Byberry; the Lennon
amendment provided for an ordinar.
trolley line over the public highway.
The Lennon amendment provides TO
$4,000. 900 for the Chestnut street subway
The Seger amendment specified no amour
for this work, but under the Taylor plan /
was estimated to cost SS,0O0,000.
During the crOss-cXamination of Dircc
tor Twining, Mr. Trainer asked:
do you play golf?"
mo" replied the Director but thu
significance of the question was not fully
understood until the Mayor arose toward
the close of the meeting and asked to b'
permitted to make an explanation.
81 am a golf player" was the Mayor.
| opening sentence.
'Is Mitten also a golf player?' asked
Mr.. Trainer.
"Yes; l played with him, and lunchet
with him and Mr.. Connolly and Senator