Year: 1877

stances.


------------------------


The Ferry Franchises.


Comptroller Kelly and his associate Com
missioners of the Sinking Fund have been
making what seems to us commendable
attempt to make the ferries owned by the
city source of greater income than they
have been heretofore. The rents paid tor
the ferries go into the sinking fund, and 1t
is important to strengthen that fund with
view to the ultimate extinction Of the city
debt. The Comptroller has had oil the city
property appraised, and in advertising for
bids for the ferry leases, month or two
since, he adopted an unusual rule to
regulate the bidding. Instead of inviting
bidders to offer specific sum as an annual
rent for the several ferries he required them
to offer percentage of the gross receipts,
and, in order to protect the city, he fixed
minimum of five per cent of the receipts on
the New York side as starting point for tho
bids.


The vigorous fight which the ferry COM
panies have made against this proposition
attests it's wisdom. Nobody believes that
they would fight against their own interests,
and their vigorous opposition proves that
the city would receive larger income from
the ferries under the new method than under
the old. The ferry companies first went
into the courts and got an injunction on the
Comptroller which caused some six or seven
postponements Of the advertised sale until
the injunction was dissolved. But when
~, |. a.. 81, dc
on September 6, there were no offers for the
most of the ferries, and the sale had to be
again postponed. The existing companies,
which would be natural bidders, made OBJ
jections to the proffered form OF lease, but
this was only subterfuge to embarrass the
city authorities Their real objection is to
paying a percentage of their receipts, be-
cause it would give the city supervision
of their business and inspection Of
their books which would enable
it to know what the ferries are
really worth. The companies stick at no
expedient for protecting themselves against
any such knowledge of the amount OF their
receipts. They have gone SO far as to set
up the absurd pretence that the bid of
percentage, instead of the bid of specific
annual rent, is contrary to law, because no-
body could tell who was the highest bidder,
and the law is very strict in its requirement
that ferry franchises be sold to the highest
bidder The argument of the companies
on this point is that the receipts would be
greater OF less according as the ferries were
we'll or i'll managed, and that as the
present companies better understand
the business their receipts would be
greater, and the bid of u smaller percentage
by them might yield greater income to
the city. 1t is hence argued that it would
be impossible to determine by this method
who were the highest bidders. This ingen-
ious refinement is mere fetch 1t is per-
fectly ridiculous to pretend that one COM
pany would get more passengers across
particular ferry than another. People cross
ferry because their business or their occa-
sions compel them. 1t Is absurd to reason
Oh ferry passage as if it were pleasure
trip to be made or not according to the at
tractiveness of the accommodations. 1t is
the interest of ferry companies to carry all
passengers who wish to pass, and the gross

receipts would be nearly equal under any
management.


We hope the Comptroller will adhere to
his purpose in spite Of obstacles. If the
form of lease is Objectionable he has already
signifed his willingness to have it changed.
1t might, perhaps, be wise for him also to
yield the five per cent minimum, for the
really great point is to change all the leases
to the percentage basis, and establish that
as the future policy Of the city in the sale
of ferry franchises. The advantage of that
method is that it would enable the city to
know the precise value of this part OF its
property, SO that in future leases rivals of
the existing companies would not have to
take leap in the dark in Offering bids.


The First Week OF tho Dramatic


Season.