568 



NEW YORK (STATE). 



the line of the new aqueduct, securing plans, 

 making contracts, and supervising the whole 

 work, in the hands of a commission, and the 

 controversy arose out of the method of appoint- 

 ing the commissioners. At first it was pro- 

 posed that the Mayor, Comptroller, President 

 of the Department of Taxes and Assessments, 

 President of the Board of Aldermen, Commis- 

 sioner of Public Works, and two citizens to be 

 appointed by the mayor, should constitute the 

 commission. This was modified so as to make 

 the Mayor, Comptroller, and Commissioner of 

 Public Works the official members. Then it 

 was proposed to have four citizen members 

 appointed by the mayor. This was strenuously 

 opposed by some of the city representatives, 

 who favored naming the commissioners in the 

 bill. After much controversy it was decided 

 that there should be only three citizen com- 

 missioners, and these were named in the bill, be- 

 ing James C. Spencer, George W. Lane, and 

 William Dowd. All effort to secure the addition 

 of a fourth citizen commissioner, or to have any 

 power of selection left to the mayor, was de- 

 feated. The issue throughout was between 

 those who wished to prevent political control 

 over the aqueduct-work, and those who were 

 credited with a desire to have such control, 

 and the latter were successful. An effort was 

 made, after the close of the session, to induce 

 the Governor to veto the bill, but on the 1st 

 day of June he gave it his approval, filing a 

 memorandum of his reasons, which were main- 

 ly that there was urgent need of the new aque- 

 duct, and he saw no evidence of the political 

 jobbery alleged. The support given to the 

 bill in the form in which it became a law 

 was almost wholly Democratic, and the op- 

 position was entirely Republican. (See NEW 

 YOKK CITY.) A bill was also passed author- 

 izing the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund 

 of the City of New York to investigate the 

 merits of a scheme for obtaining a supple- 

 mentary water - supply under high pressure 

 from the Ramapo valley, in Orange and Rock- 

 land counties, and if convinced of the advis- 

 ability thereof, to contract on behalf of the 

 city, for the use of water thus to be supplied. 

 One of the conditions provided for was that, 

 within two years after the contract was en- 

 tered into with the company proposing to con- 

 struct the works, not less than 50,000,000 gal- 

 lons per day of pure and wholesome water 

 should be furnished, under a pressure due to a 

 head of at least 300 feet above tide-water. 



A bill requiring the elevated railroads in 

 the city of New York to reduce their fares to 

 five cents for each trip at all hours of the day 

 passed both houses after much agitation. In 

 the Assembly it was passed by a vote of 109 to 

 6, and in the Senate the vote was 24 to 5. It 

 was nevertheless vetoed by the Governor after 

 a hearing given to the advocates and opponents 

 of the measure. The Governor argued at some 

 length that the act was unconstitutional, be- 

 cause a contract had been entered into allow- 



ing the companies to charge the existing rates 

 of fare under the sanction of past legislation. 

 The power of the Legislature to reduce fares 

 under the General Railroad Act was limited by 

 the condition that it could not be done without 

 the consent of the corporations when it would 

 reduce the profits to less than 10 per cent, of 

 the " capital actually expended." This the 

 Governor also regarded as a contract of the 

 State, the obligation of which would be im- 

 paired by the bill. He furthermore believed 

 that it would involve a breach of faith, inas- 

 much as liberal inducements had been neces- 

 sary, and had been offered, to secure rapid 

 transit in New York, and the rates of fare al- 

 lowed were an essential part of the considera- 

 tion under which capital had ventured into the 

 enterprise. An effort to pass the bill over the 

 veto was unsuccessful. The Railroad Com- 

 missioners were then called on to report upon 

 the amount of capital "actually expended" in 

 the construction of the elevated railroads, and 

 the ratio of their profits to such expenditure. 

 Two reports were submitted on the 19th of 

 April, one signed by Commissioners Rogers and 

 Kernan, and the other by Commissioner 

 O'Donnell. The companies claimed that the 

 cost of construction was $30,646,659.27, but 

 they included discount on bonds and other 

 items which the commissioners did not regard 

 as properly belonging to that account. They 

 made deductions which left the "total cash 

 cost" at $22,683,253.14. The capitalization of 

 the companies was found to be: Manhattan 

 Railway Company stock, $13,000,000, of which 

 nothing was ever paid in ; New York Elevated 

 Railroad Company stock, $6,500,000 ; Metro- 

 politan Railroad Company stock, $6,500,000 ; 

 New York Company's funded debt, $8,500,000 ; 

 Metropolitan Company's funded debt, $12,- 

 818,000; total, $47,338,000. The commis- 

 sioners did not regard the stock of the Man- 

 hattan Company as representing in any sense 

 "capital actually expended." The gross in- 

 come for the year ending Sept. 30, 1882, was 

 stated at $5,973,633.41, of which $3,212,589.03 

 was derived from the lines of the New York 

 Company, and $2,755,483.62 from the lines 

 of the Metropolitan Company. The operating 

 expenses were $1,794,871.83 for the roads of 

 the New York Company, and $1,796,684.88 

 for those of the Metropolitan. Taxes and in- 

 terest on funded debt left the net income at 

 $352,069.37. Mr. O'Donnell did not agree with 

 his colleagues as to the definition of capital ex- 

 pended and net income. He found the total 

 capital actually expended on the entire elevated 

 system to be $22,250,608.72, and the net in- 

 come to be $2,375,910.54. He held that the 

 roads are built under special charters ; that the 

 Legislature could amend, alter, or repeal these 

 charters, and that there was no contract be- 

 tween the city or State not to reduce the fare. 

 Mr. O'Donnell concluded by recommending 

 the passage of a law fixing the " five-cent 

 hours" on the elevated roads at from 4 to 10 



