New-York tribune., 1919-09-10
p. S. Commissioner Tells
Mayor He Has Concrete
Case for Court to Test
Power to r a 8 e Fares
Queens Hearing Enjoined
Before Postponement Coun.
sci Says Strike Has Been
Called for September IL

Nixon Informed Mayor Hylan in let
ter yesterday that he would welcome
legal adjudication of the commissions
powers by application to the courts.
The commissioner replied to the Mayors
plain questions" contained in letter
of last Saturday, and ne further wrote
the Mayor that thus far you have
done nothing"
The letter was drawn up after the
Public Service Commissioner had been
served with writ of prohibition en-
joining him from holding a fare in
crease hearing on the application of
the Manhattan & Queens Traction Cor
poration. The hearing had been sched-
uled to take place in. the commissions
Offices lut Deputy Commissioner Ed
ward }. Glennon, who was presiding,
ordered the case postponed until the
writs are argued in the Supreme Court
on Friday.
The Letter to the Mayor
Commissioner Nixon's letter to the
Mayor follows:
Il am in receipt of your communica-
tion Of September s, 1919, in regard
to the application of the receiver of
the Manhattan and Queens Traction
Corporation. After specifying three
questions which you desire me TO
answer, and to which l will hereafter
refer, you state that you think that
the time has arrived when the power
of the Public Service Commission to
change or abrogate the city railway
franchises should be raised and de-
% inn bo ~
have asked these plain questions to
obtain definite answers so that. il
necessary, you may cause a writ Of
prohibition to be obtained restrain
ing ME from in any way attempting
to Increase the rate Of fare 'coven-
anted and agreed upon in a duly ex-
ecuted contract between the people of
the city of New York and the railway
companies
Without awaiting an answer you
have secured a temporary stay even
of my duty to ascertain facts by
hearing.
Gas usual, my purpose in sending
the application to you appears to have
been misunderstood. This company is
in financial straits. That is evidenced
by the fact that it is in the hands of
a receiver. 1t made an application to
nc, which | transmitted to you, with
the hope that you would suggest a
solution
ut was my intention to hold hear
ing for the purpose of ascertainng
sells office had been notified to that
effect. When the facts were ascer-
tained you and the Board of Estimate
If the facts warranted it, could have
granted the receiver such relief as he
is entitled to receive. In case YOU did
not act it might have been incumbent
upon me to do so. l am interested in
compelling service, if it may be done,
to the end that the public may not be
inconvenienced.
Questions and Answers
The questions you PROFOUND are as
follows:
Il. Is it your intention to enter
tain the application OF this company
for an increase of fare and conse-
quent modification of it's contract
with the city?
ut was my intention to hear the
company's application and to invest-
gate its financial condition.
.2. If, after the public hearings
referred to in your letter you CON
clude that the financial condition of
the company needs an increase OF
fare, is it your intention to order and
authorize such increase, notwith-
standing its contract with the city
for tive-cent fare?"
81 did not know what the public
hearings would disclose. CONSEQUENTLY
I had not formulated any judgment.
and will be unable to do so until all
the facts are before me. 1t was my
intention to ascertain facts and en-
deavor TO have relief extended through
the city, if possible"
"3. Do you claim the legal right to
modify and change existing city fran
chise contracts with the railroads by
increasing the rate of fare provided
for in such contracts without the
consent of the city authorities ?"
Expression Exceedingly Vague
"The expression existing city fran
chise contracts with the railroads is
exceedingly vague. Exactly what the
writer means | do not appreciate. So
called city franchises were granted
prior to the year 1874. when the state
constitution was mended and since
that time. The Quimby case apparent
ly makes a distinction between the two
classes OF franchises. | claim the 'le-
gal right to exercise all the powers
conferred upon me by the Public Ser
vice Commission law, as that statute
has been construed by the Court of
Appeals
You state you ask these plain ques-
tions in order to obtain definite an
swers,' so that if necessary writ of
prohibition might be obtained. Your
questions are by no means plain. They
imply, which is untrue, that I have
made up my mind to do certain things
which you contend are illegal I did
not intend to do anything unless your
failure to act compelled me to do
something.
"Furthermore you seek to create the
impression that l am delaying or at
tempting to delay the action of the
courts in passing upon the question OF
this commissions powers. Iou have
had ample opportunity iii the pas. if
your advisers reached the conclvaion
that l am exceeding my powers, TO
question the legality OF my actions. /
have already decided the application Of
the New York and North Shore Trac-
ton Company.
"lf you seriously question my power
instance, you have a concrete case. in
which all the facts are presented, in
which you may apply to the court and
obtain legal adjudication of this
commissions powers. And the COM
mission will not only welcome such a
controversy but it will also gladly CO.
operate with you in securing a SPEEDY
determination. Thus far you have
done nothing. To repeat, I am ready
and willing to expedite the determina