Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

that there was more complaint on the part of the public because of the night work than because of the transportation by day.

From a consideration of the testimony and the statements made by Commissioner Bensel, your Committee is of opinion that no action should be taken by the Commission in this matter and would recommend that the order submitted herewith be adopted.

Dismissal Order No. 71 was thereupon adopted.
Order No. 12. (See Order No. 6, page 11 herein.)

Interborough Rapid Transit Company. - General increase of

service. Hearing Order No. 13, issued August 29, 1907, p. 689, 1907 Rep. Final Order No. 33, issued October 9, 1907, p. 696, 1907 Rep.

Interborough Rapid Transit Company.- Increase of service be

tween West Farms and stations on Second and Third avenue

elevated lines. Hearing Order No. 14, issued August 29, 1907, p. 689, 1907 Rep.

New York City Railway Company.-Service on Broadway line.

Hearing Order No. 15, issued August 29, 1907, p. 689, 1907 Rep.
Final Order No. 43, issued October 23, 1907, p. 701, 1907 Rep.

Hearing Order No. 16.

(See Order No. 11, page 17 herein.)

Order No. 17.

(See Order No. 6, page 11 herein.)

Union Railway Company of New York City. - General Increase

of service.

Hearing Order No. 18, issued September 13, 1907, p. 690, 1907 Rep.
Final Order No. 107, issued November 22, 1907, p. 727, 1907 Rep.

Coney Island and Brooklyn Railroad Company.—Additional

Equipment and Appliances.
Hearing Order No. 19, issued August 21, 1907, p. 690, 1907 Rep.
Final Order No. 21, issued September 13, 1907, p. 691, 1907 Rep.
Final Order No. 60, issued October 30, 1907, p. 716, 1907 Rep.
Case not closed in 1907, see page 589 herein.

[blocks in formation]

Order No. 21. (See Order No. 19, page 18 herein.)

Gas and Electrical Corporations.— Filing of corporate documents.

Filing Order No. 22, issued August 20, 1907, p. 686, 1907 Rep. (Published in 1907 Report as Order No. S-A.)

New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company; New

New York and Putnam Railroad Company; New York and • Harlem Railroad Company.- Inadequate local service in the

Bronx.
Complaint Order No. 23, issued September 18, 1907, p. 693, 1907 Rep.
Case not closed in 1907, see page 467 herein.

Interborough Rapid Transit Company.—Additional stairways at

137th street and Broadway station and 145th street and

Broadway station.
Order No. 21, issued September 18, 1907, p. 693, 1907 Rep.
Case not closed in 1907, see page 339 herein.

Forty-second Street, Manhattanville and St. Nicholas Avenue

Railway Company.- Inadequate service on Boulevard and

Broadway lines.
Hearing Order No. 25, issued September 25, 1907, p. 693, 1907 Rep.
Opinion of Commissioner Maltbie.
Final Order No. 44, issued October 23, 19907, p. 703, 1907 Rep.

OPINION OF COMMISSION.

(Adopted October 23, 1907.) COMMISSIONER MALTBIE:

Upon August 29th the Commission adopted an order directing that an inquiry be held upon September 16th, to determine the adequacy of the service and equipment of the New York City Railway Company upon the Broadway line and upon certain other lines in connection therewith. Accordingly a hearing was held and evidence taken upon September 16th. The hearing was continued upon September 23d, at which time the Commission received notice that the cars upon Broadway whose southern destination was Houston street -- the ones primarily affected by the order — were operated by the Forty-second Street, Manhattan and St. Nicholas Avenue Railway Company, and not by the New York City Railway Company. This was the first notice the Commission had had of this fact, and as the original notice for a hearing had been served upon the New York City Railway Company, it became necessary, in order to make the procedure valid, to adjourn it and serve a new notice upon the company which was actually operating the cars.

A new order for a hearing upon October 7th, running against the Forty-second Street, Manhattanville and St. Nicholas Avenue Railway Company, was adopted by the Commission on September 25th. Upon this date — October 7th the hear

ing relating to the New York City Railway Company was also reopened and the agreement between the two companies entered upon the records of each hearing. The documents submitted showed that the agreement had expired but that it was being continued by mutual consent. Upon October 9th the two hearings were merged and further evidence taken. Further hearings were held upon October 14th and October 16th, when the case was closed, at the request of the railway company.

In the meantime the Commission had received notice that receivers had been appointed for the New York City Railway Company by Judge Lacombe of the United States Circuit Court, and that the operation of the road was entirely in their hands. Notice of the hearing was served upon Messrs. Joline and Robinson, the receivers, and of the increase of the service proposed, but they did not appear either personally or by counsel.

The evidence presented by the inspectors of the Commission and Mr. Oren Root, general manager of the company, shows that the service between 6 A, M. and 7 P. M. has not been sufficient to provide seats for the passengers ; that many cars have been switched back at Houston street which should le sent through, at least as far as Murray street, to accommodate the traffic; that approximately one-quarter of the cars switched back at Houston street should be sent further down town, at least to Murray street; that the cars which have been run through to South Ferry have borne no destination signs indicating this fact; and that the congestion upon other cars has been increased because of this fact.

Sufficient data are not available at this moment to indicate whether the service cpon the lines run in connection with the Broadway line is inadequate. Further observations will not be taken, but an order may be issued without delay in relation to the service on Broadway south of Houston street, and I beg to recommend the adoption of the order accompanying this report, and to 'say further that the company has been coinplying with it for sometime, so far as the increase of service is required.

The evidence taken in these hearings, including the numerous exhibits, is also submitted herewith.

Thereupon Final Order No. 14 was issued.
See proceedings under Order No. 10.

Richmond Light and Railroad Company.- Operation of cars

around Fort Wadsworth curve. Hearing Order No. 26. issueil September 27, 1907, p. 694, 1907 Rep. Final Order No. 50, issued October 25, 1907, p. 709, 1907 Rep.

Gas Corporations.— Gas meter testing. Order No. 27, issued September 30, 1907, p. 694, 1907 Rep.

Gas and Electrical Corporations.- Notice of accidents.
Opinion of Commissioner Maltbie.
Filing Order No. 28, issued Oetober 4, 1907, p. 695, 1907 Rep.

OPINION OF COMMISSION.

(Adopted October 4, 1907.) COMMISSIONER MALTBIE :

As the Committee to whom was referred the question of accident reports from gas and electric companies, I beg to submit the following report :

Under the statutes in force prior to July 1, 1907, the Commission of Gas and Electricity - - our predecessors required every gas and electricity corporation to report regularly every accident resulting in loss of life or any injury to person in connection with the operation of their plants. The statutory provisions under which the Commission exercised this function were incorporated in the Public Service Commissions Law of 1907, but since July 1st of this yea no gas or electricity corporation has regularly reported accidents, although the Commission of Gas and Electricity had adopted a form of report which had not been revoked prior to July 1st, and for which no form has since been substituted by this Commission.

After thoroughly considering the question, it seems to your Committee that accidents should be promptly reported, and that a form for such reports should be adopted by the Commission, The preparation of such reports will not be a hardship upon any corporation, and the reports will give considerable information which can be utilized by the Commission in preparing orders to prevent recurrence of accidents.

I recommend, therefore, that the following resolution be adopted by the Commission :

Thereupon Filing Order No. 28 was issued.

New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company.

Smoke nuisance, Harlem river yards. Complaint Order No. 29, issued October 4, 1908, p. 695, 1907 Rep. Case not closed in 1907; see page 582 herein.

Union Railway Company of New York City; Interborough Rapid

Transit Company and New York City Interborough Rail-
way Company.- Discrimination in fares between West-

chester and points in New York city.
Complaint Order No. 30, issued October 9, 1907, p. 696, 1907 Rep.
Hearing Order No. 57, issued October 30, 1907, p. 715, 1907 Rep.
Complaint Order No. 58, issued October 30, 1907, p. 715, 1907 Rep.
Final Order No. 146, issued December 9, 1907, p. 736, 1907 Rep.

Interborough Rapid Transit Company. - Inadequate stairway

facilities, Cortlandt street station, Ninth avenue “L.Complaint Order No. 31, issued October 9, 1907, p. 696, 1907 Rep.

Coney Island and Brooklyn Railroad Company.- Service on

Smith street line.
Hearing Order No. 32, issued October 9, 1907, p. 696, 1907 Rep.
Fina! Order No. 161, issued December 11, 1907, p. 744, 1907 Rep.

Final Order No. 33.

(See Order No. 13, page 18 herein.)

Brooklyn Union Elevated Railroad Company, Inadequate ser

vice — Additional station signs and stairways.
Complaint Order No. 34, issued October 11, 1907, p. 699, 1907 Rep.
Complaint Order No. 35, issued October il, 1907, p. 700, 1907 Rep.
Opinion of Commissioner Bassett.
Hearing Order No. 89, issued November 13, 1907, p. 722, 1907 Rep.
Final Order No. 156, issued December 16, 1907, p. 742, 1907 Rep.
Case not closed in 1907; see page 634 herein.

OPINION OF COMMISSION.

(Adopted November 7, 1907.) COMMISSIONER BASSETT :

This complaint, dated September 13, 1907, was made up of about thirty different items. Upon its receipt it was referred to me for analysis. I reported that some of the items should be held in abeyance and for further investigation ; that others should be forwarded to Mr. Ivins, and that the remainder should be forwarded as complaints to the operating company; this was done and the Brooklyn Union Elevated Railroad Company duly answered, forwarding a copy of its answer to the complainant. The complainant replied ; the answer and reply were referred to me.

The answers of the operating company express compliance with six of the items, viz. :

Opening the side doors at all times on the bridge cars.
Operation of more cars on Broadway elevated line.
More trains on Sundays and holidays.
Extension of platforms.

Operating Gates avenue short line cars to Manhattan Junction on the Lexington avenue line.

Six car trains instead of five car trains on the Lexington avenue line.

It seems desirable that a hearing should be had on some of the items of complaint with which the operating company does not express compliance; these items are the following: That at least 150 additional elevated station signs, be prepared and placed by

said company, properly distributing them among their various elevated, surface

and depressed road stations, To provide more or wider stairways at the Gates avenue and Halsey street stations

of the Lexington avenue line. In case there is further work of reinforcing the elevated structure on Broadway,

not to decrease the present headroom, To remove the Tillary street station and platform. To repair and keep in first class order the Lafayette avenue station of the Fulton

street elevated road, even if the same shall not be put into present use. To operate midnight trains on all elevated lines with not over fifteen minutes

headway at least until 1 o'clock A. M. I have asked the counsel to prepare an order for a hearing on the last mentioned items, and submit the proposed order for hearing herewith.

There are various other items with which the operating company does not express compliance, and which are not included in the order for hearing. The reason for this is that they are the same as, or are included in investigations and hearings now under way, which have been initiated from other sources.

Thereupon Hearing Order No. 89 was issued.

Brooklyn Union Elevated Railroad Company and Brooklyn

Heights Railroad Company.- Transfers from Nostrand

avenue trolley line to Fulton street elevated. Complaint Order No. 36, issued October 11, 1907, p. 700, 1907 Rep. Case not closed in 1907; see page

herein.

See footnote, page 9.

« AnteriorContinuar »