The New York herald., 1922-04-20
MILLER MAY GUST HYLAN
IN TRANSIT FIGHT, HE WARNS

| traffic in this town--that which certers
in Canal street.
"The tunnel has been dug: the rails
have been bought: but now, for nearly
a year the Board of Estimate has de-
layed action on the approval of the
contracts for the ties and spikes with
which to lay those rails.
Meanwhile. $1,000 a day In interest
is being added to the cost of investment.
TO the cost OF construction ON the city's
4 already invested seventeen millions OF
money. Three-quarters of million dol
lars have accumulated In interest. added
to the cost. while these contracts have
been sleeping before tho Board OF Esti-
mate. aIfd meanwhile the people who
would thus have at least been furnished
some relief are being herdcd like sheep
at the Canal street station.
/ 'The duty to pass on those contracts
is ministerial. I have no doubt that q
taxpayer. certainly q party to the con-
tract, could compel action. but I am
led to make another observation. that
that sort of conduct. if persisted In too
long. may become such gross viola tion
of official duty as to justify, indeed
IL need be, to require more drastic
| action.
1 sDoom of Two Faced Champions.o
And I am led to make another OBJ
servation. and that Is that the time Is
| approaching. IL 1t has not already ar
rived, when public officials viii be unable
successfully to pose as the champions
of the people while denying them neces-
sary measures for their relief.
You have a Transit Commission.
| What has it done in the face OF all the
obstructive tactics that cunning could
put in Its way? 1t was charged with
the duty to prepare a plan of reorgan-
ization. That tentative plan has been
ON the table for months, for public crit
iscism. for the criticism of the city adj
ministration, for the criticism of the
companies themselves.
II have heard but two criticisms de-
serving Of notice. One is that the plan
provides for city representation on the
Board of Control. and 1t is said that that
may introduce politics into the manage
ment. / admit that there Is danger Of
| that, a danger which needs to be
guarded as well as 1t may be, but that
/. Is an objection which goes to city own
ership. and that question you have al
ready decided.
You decided 1t when you invested
your three hundred millions of credit in
the subways In the management of
which you now have no voice whatever.
| City ownership carries with it in my
Judgment as a necessary corollary at
least equal representation of the city
4 on the Board of Control equal with the
| operating companies. That is provided
for in the plan. That is real home rule,
as contrasted with the curious brand
which is merely a political slogan to
take or drop as political exigency or
individual necessities or desires may
suggest.
"Cfty Ownership Required"
You have already decided the ques-
ton of city ownership. I have no doubt
that private ownership OF public utilities
properly regulated is likely to be more
efficient and more economical. but you
have passed that point, and IL you had
| not passed 1t your necessities as they
exist to-day would require in my judg-
ment city ownership.
You are under the necessity OF re-
lieving congestion, not alone Of travel
but In living conditions, and apart from
the evils Of private ownership. stock
manipulation and what not--which un-
der private regulation ought not to occur
and trust will never be permitted again
you can only expect lines to be con-
structed as they will pay.
You can only expect lines to be con-
structed where the traffic is most con.
/ gested; and therefore you add conges-
ton to congestion. To relieve that con-
gestion you must build up the outlying
sections, and to do that you must secure,
make travel comfortable. uniform cheap.
You can only do that under a unified
system. The profitable part must carry
the Improbable, all for n single fare,
and you cannot expect to accomplish
that result except by city ownership. SO
the first objection disappears.
"Return Must BE Guaranteed.-
"The second objection goes to the
question OF flexible fares. You have
only one thing to offer to the proposed
investor or to the existing security
holders. You cannot expect that the
security holders win give up the chance
Of a speculative rise in the market value
OF their shares except you are able to
offer them certain return on the shares
that they are to get back in exchange
or less nominal value.
You can give that assurance In but
one OF two ways---cither by guaranteeing
a fare which will make that return or by
agreeing to make UP any deficit out of
the city treasury / should not think
that the taxpayers OF this city woutd
consider IL a sound business propositidfi
to carry the hundreds of thousands OF
transients who daily visit this city for
less than It costs. But apart from that
YOU will get better operation. more ef-
ficient operation. more economical opera
ton, II you will make the system carry
its own burdens than you will IL you
afford the opportunity to dip into the
city treasury at any time there Is a
deficit
And. mind you. this is all coming
out OF the pockets of the people who ride
Treat the question as It should be
treated. as a question OF service Estab-
lish on proper lines your system so as to
give a maximum OF service for a mini
mum of cost and the fare question will
take care OF itself.
by treating II as a question OF fares
instead OF as question OF service. you
I