The New York herald. [volume] (New York, N.Y.) 1920-1924, 1922-02-05

''Ihe engineers arc simply speaking OF
the technical end OF the matter and not
looking nj n In the broad light" said Mr.
Pounds ",fhcy do not take into consid-
GRAFTON any compensation that might be
given To the railroads for their present
Investment In water equipment. Presi-
dent Hea states fatty that the tunnel
from Grecnville 20 Bay Ridge AS proposed
by us IL moro feasible and proper. II II
tunnel is 20 be built.
''As for tho railway executives. they
nre OF course conservative. We have
had several conferences with them. and.
while they cannot DO quoted. would
say their attitude 10 that tho plan as
outlined by us has got 20 come"
In sending n copy OF Mr.. Rca's letter
TO Senator Charles J. Hewitt. chairman
OF the Senate Finance Committee. which
has under consideration tho bill OF the
Port Authority Mr.. Outcrbridge wrote:
I'VE are unable to account for the fact
that this letter was not brought out at
the hearing. as we are Informed II was
IN tho hands OF the Mayor the day be-
fore
Mr., Outerbridgo pointed out that one
or tho briefs offered for tho city or
iiyian plan at the hearing on Tuesday
made tho declaration that cooperation on
tho part OF tho trunk limo railroads was
essential To the success OF the city plan.
The Hea letter and tho report OF tho rail-
roads engineers, upon which II was
based. establishes once and for all that
the trunk limo railroads will not COOP
crate with the city plan.
Tho engineers OF the railroads, after
going over tho city plan with the city
ensineers. reached these conclusions:
"O II In believed. with tho coop.
Grafton OF the public. that existing float
equipment. float bridges. yards, &c.
with relatively small Increase In
capacity. arc sufficient to take care OF
tho present and any prospective In
crease In business for many years
"ts From tho foregoing analysis II
VIII be- observed that this tunnel aud
the connecting lines. from IA physical
standpoint. are feasible. but from tho
data used. which IN believed To be con.
sentative. and from tho circumstances
surrounding our engineering study OF
tho whole subject OF tho movement OF
traffic between New Jersey and Long
trunk lines 10 embark In this or any
other freight tunne- enterprise and as
sumo tho burdens that would attach
TO H."
Referring 20 this report. Mr.. Dea In
his letter 10 Mayor IIylan said:
Uea Analyses Report.
"The deduction thorcfrom briefly IN
that tht trunk lines would not bo jus-
titled IN participating IN tho aAsunip-
ton OF tho carrying charges for such
n large work. includingg tho tunnel un-
der the Narrows. which. IN their judy
ment. iA not now nor IN s:ie near ~.
ture required for tho volume OF traffic
moving. Aeconc. that tho approaches
to such IA tunnel by way OF Perth AM
boy. and large bridge over the Arthur
XIII. thence traversing Staten island
and tunneling under tho Narrows
would entirely change tho operation OF
n majority OF tho trunk lines whose
Long Island and New r.ngiand traffic
would be expected 10 40 through such
a tunnel
''rhe Lohigh Valley. Pennsylvania
and Jersey Central all have their ter
mlnai yards wei up toward tho New
York harbor front on the Jersty side
and are constantly expanc.ng the same,
aud tho Long Island and Now ENGLAND
traffic now largely moves BY water
over to Ray Ridge. and the facilities
for such movement arc ample Tor tho
prenent volume of bnalneas and Tor a
considerable Increase thereof, aud when
Tho tfnfflc demands, and can carry tho
cost az direct rail connection " mas