The New York herald. [volume] (New York, N.Y.) 1920-1924, 1921-02-01

=
rassment in requiring a full measure OF
service from railroads as to which II
lacks the power to regulate rates
Enormous Dencit for 1870.
In his report for 1920 Public Ser
vice Commissioner Alfred NJ. Barrett for
the First district. said the deficit for the
railroad companies In the First dtstric.
for the year ended June so. 1920. was
$l0.7S5.3ss. The increased cost Of labor
and material. he said. IL largely respon-
sible for this deficit He stated that the
outstanding conditions referred 10 by his
predecessor, Mr.. Nixon. In his report Of
March I. 1890, are still the outstanding
features for the year 1920. The physical
properties have been allowed to run
down until the deferred maintenance for
all the companies In the city now
reaches $10.945.091. an increase Of $4.-
1906 Under these conditions the
Commissioner asks the very pertinent
question how long the companies can
continue to operate without adequate
maintenance. Then he wonders how the
money Is to be provided to take care Of
the deferred maintenance. which is now
or will soon be as great as the cost OF
buying new equipment
"Of the EST cities In the United States
with a population OF $4,000 or more. ex-
Guiding New York city. with a COM
bined population OF 4.s62.000, 1a7 are
paying on 10 cent basis: two cities
have cent fares. twenty-eight have 8
cent fares, twenty-four have z cent
fares. hfty-six have 6 cent fares. Bos-
ton has 10 cent fare and Chicago a
10 cent fare on its elevated lines and
Philadelphia a 7 cent fare with cent
exchange, making a total Of 10 cents"
~ ho
the legal rights involved. Mr.. Quacken-
bush believes that. to use the phrase OF
the Governor, there Is a great deal Of
loose talking and loose thinking being
done among those who are prating vehe-
mently Of the inviolability of the cent
fare and of the other aspects of the
contract between the city and the OPP
Grating company.
What the Legislature gave" he says
that 1t can take away or modify
Neither the marlborough nor the city
OF New York can get rid of the terms
Of this contract. but the State of New
York can get rid Of it. or can modify it
at will. without the consent of either Of
the actual parties to 1t. And the State
Of New York can delegate that au-
thority to q commission which may be-
come its agent.
when the marlborough contracted
with the city to operate the subway
for a s cent fare neither party couiu
have anticipated that the war would
make performance financially impossi-
BILE.
1T would seem. therefore. only rea-
sonable for the PARTIES to the contract
to modify it by mutual agreement.
1.-THE case is like one where a con-
tractor, while prosecuting sewer work
and before its completion, struck a body
of quicksand below the surface of the
earth Of great extent and directly In the
line of the sewer. the existence Of which
was unknown heretofore to both the
contractor and the city and could not
have been anticipated by either of them.
LIT was optional with the city either
to prosecute him for non-performance or
waive that right and make new agree
ment on a more just and equitable basis.
The city wisely. as I think. chose the
latter
1t was further stated In the ruling OF
the court: 1.-THE contract being subject
to legislative control, the Intervention Of