New-York tribune., 1921-03-23
The Knight-AdIer Bill

The knight-Adler Bill
With the passage Of the Knight
Adler bill the traction issue gets out
ct the fog of vagueness and govern
mental theory heretofore cnveloping
it and is in the way of becoming
something definite.
The main thing to be noted this
morning is that there is as yet no
solution, or even attempted solution,
of the traction puzzle. All that has
been done is to create an agency to
seek solution. What this agency
will do is not yet Indicated. No plan
is set up; all that is done is to estab-
lish machinery to prepare one.
So far as the Legislature has
power to achieve such a thing. New
York City is deprived Of practically
all control over traction matters.
Contracts Of long existence, under
the terms Of which $300,000,000 Of
the money Of local taxpayers has
been invested, have been scrapped.
It is to be taken for GRANTED the
act will go to the courts for review.
The Constitution is explicit in its
prohibition against the confscation
Of private property Does the prohi-
bition apply to community invest
ment when large number Of per-
sons join in the ownership Of prop
city?
Governor Miller, who is a good
lawyer, holds that it does not-that
the states power to take away a
city's property, or at least control
of its use, is paramount. But many
ether lawyers hold to contrary
view. The courts will doubtless be
called on to decide, and they will
find few, If any, direct precedents to
guide tl-em.
IF the law is sustained a situation
will be created in which a commits
sion Of three, not required to report
its acts for approval anywhere, will
first ascertain tho facts and then
formulate and put into effect a plan.
The task will be one of great diff
Guilty, and sympathy may we'll go out
to the commission. In the first
place, even though it possesses plen-
ary power to modify contracts on
the city's side, 1t has no similar
power with respect to private inter-
ests. These must voluntarily con-
sent.
With thirty-five companies, each
with a different set Of security
holders, it will be extraordinary if
all can be induced to agree and not
to use the discretion lodged with
them under the general corporation
law. A single fare plan will encoun-
ter very great practical difficulties.
Fair-minded persons concede that
the five-cent fare does not now pro-
duce income sufficient to pay oper-
ating expenses plus reasonable re-
turn on the value Of the property
used in the public service. The sur
face car lines have deficits; so has
the elevated, and 80 has the subway,
although the subway's deficit is con-
cealed BY the fact that the city now
\ pays out Of its general funds inter
est on the city's investment. But tho
4 deficits vary in size. and to level
fares means to decide what lines are
TO % discontinued as archaic or else
place heavy burden on the passen-
gers on the more economical lines.
So, though common sense, if serv-
ice is to be kept up, requires larger
sum than is now contributed by
traction users, the proper distribu-
tion Is a most complicated problem
runs into all sorts Of social as well
as financial questions.
In this stage Of affairs It is
thus impossible to say whether or not
what the commission will do viii be
in the public's interest or against it.
Tho reason for the extraordinary
delegation Of authority is that the
Hylan administration has proved it.
self incapable Of handling the big
business. It has played demagogic
politics, and this could not be en-
dured. Governor Miller has every
reason for avoiding a similar fiasco,
for by its practical results his work
will be judged.