A. Gardner, Esq., appearing for the Interborough Rapid Transit Company, and by adjournment duly had on June 10, 1908, before Mr. Commissioner Willcox presiding, Arthur DuBois, Esq., Assistant Counsel, appearing for the Commission, and Alfred A. Gardner, Esq., appearing for the Interborough Rapid Transit Company, and by adjournment duly had on June 29, 1908, before Commissioners Eustis, Willcox and Bassett, Arthur DuBois, Esq., Assistant Counsel, appearing for the Commission, Alfred A. Gardner, Esq., appearing for the Interborough Rapid Transit Company, and proof having been taken at all of said sessions: Now, it being made to appear after the proceedings upon said hearing that the regulations, equipment, appliances and service of the Interborough Rapid Transit Company, in respect to transportation of persons and property in the First District on its line known as the subway, have been and are in certain respects unsafe, unreasonable, improper and inadequate in that the cars operated in said subway are insufficiently provided with doors, and it being made to appear that changes and improvements ought reasonably to be made in the manner below set forth in order to promote the security or convenience of the public, or to secure adequate service and facilities for the transportation of passengers, and it appearing that the changes and improvements as below set forth are such as are just, reasonable, safe, adequate and proper; Therefore, on motion of George S. Coleman, Esq., Counsel to the Commission, it is Ordered: 1. That the Interborough Rapid Transit Company by alteration and reconstruction of cars now in use on its subway, provide, for use in the subway, not less than sixteen cars of the type described in figure 14 of the report of Mr. Bion J. Arnold, dated February 18, 1908, and entitled "The Subway Car," being the Commission's Exhibit 1, of March 4, 1908, copy of which is hereto attached, this type of car being designated in said report as "Car with double doors near ends." The cars to be provided shall have four doors on each side, two of the doors on each side being in the position of the doors on cars now in use in the subway, and two additional doors on each side to be of the same size as and to be placed not less than one nor more than two doors' width from the doors now in use. 2. The Interborough Rapid Transit Company shall equip these cars with pneumatic or other mechanical or electrical devices so arranged as to open and close the doors quickly, and automatically to signal to the motorman when the doors are closed. 3. That the sixteen cars to be reconstructed be so arranged that two trains of eight cars may be made up. Not less than one-half of the sixteen cars so reconstructed shall be equipped with motors. 4. Before reconstruction of the cars above described a full set of plans showing in detail the method of reconstruction shall be submitted to the Public Service Commission for the First District for approval. 5. The cars as ordered above shall be completed and ready for operation not later than October 15. 1908, and notice shall be given to the Public Service Commission for the First District when the cars are ready for operation. 6. The cars as reconstructed shall have adequate and conspicuous signs informing passengers that the doors nearer the end of each car are entrance doors, and the doors nearer the middle are exit doors. 7. The said cars as reconstructed shall be operated daily on the express service in the subway during the morning and evening rush hours on and after October 15, 1908, and notice shall be given to the Public Service Commission for the First District at least three days before said cars are to be operated. 8. The Interborough Rapid Transit Company shall take such other and further steps as may be necessary to provide as aforesaid the subway car described and shown in figure 14 of the said report of Mr. Bion J. Arnold, dated February 18, 1908, and shall do everything necessary to secure as aforesaid a fair trial for the operation of the cars hereby ordered. 9. The provisions of this order shall take effect at once, and shall continue in force until fully complied with. 10. Further ordered, That before July 15, 1908, the Interborough Rapid Transit Company notify the Public Service Commission for the First District whether the terms of this order are accepted and will be obeyed. Upon applications of the company the following extension orders were issued: EXTENSION ORDER No. 783. October 16, 1908. An order, No. 629, having been made herein on or about the 10th day of July, 1908, ordering and directing the Interborough Rapid Transit Company to reconstruct and have ready for operation not later than October 15, 1908, sixteen cars having four doors on each side, and the said Interborough Rapid Transit Company having, on the 12th day of October, 1908, applied in writing for an extension of such time. Now, on motion made and duly seconded. it is Ordered, That the time within which the Interborough Rapid Transit Company shall comply with the terms of Order No. 629 be, and the same hereby is, extended to and including the 15th day of November, 1908. EXTENSION ORDER No. 835. November 16, 1908. An order, No. 629, having been made herein on or about the 10th day of July, 1908, ordering and directing the Interborough Rapid Transit Company to reconstruct and have ready for operation not later than October 15, 1908, sixteen cars having four doors on each side, and the time within which to comply with said Order No. 629 having been extended to and including November 15, 1908, by the terms of Order No. 783 adopted October 16, 1908, and the said Interborough Rapid Transit Company having, on the 12th day of November, 1908, applied in writing for a further extension of such time. Now, on motion made and duly seconded, it is Ordered, That the time within which the Interborough Rapid Transit Company shall comply with the terms of Order No. 629 be, and the same hereby is, extended to and including the 25th day of November, 1908. CASE No. 629 EXTENSION ORDER. November 27, 1908. An order, No. 629, having been made herein on or about the 10th day of July, 1908, ordering and directing the Interborough Rapid Transit Company to reconstruct and have ready for operation not later than October 15, 1908, sixteen cars having four doors on each side, and the time within which to comply with said Order No. 629 having been extended to and including November 15th, 1908, by the terms of Order No. 783, adopted October 16, 1908, and the time within which to comply with said Order No. 629 having been further extended to and including November 25, 1908, by the terms of Order No. 835 adopted November 16, 1908. and the said Interborough Rapid Transit Company having, on the 24th day of November, 1908, applied in writing for a further extension of such time, Now, on motion made and duly seconded, it is Ordered, That the time within which the Interborough Rapid Transit Company shall comply with the terms of Order No. 629 be, and the same hereby is, extended to and including the 15th day of January, 1909. Interborough Rapid Transit Company.- Placing and maintenance of vending and weighing machines in the BrooklynManhattan subway. In the Matter of the Hearing on Motion of the Commission as to the Regulations, Practices, Equipment and Service of HEARING ORDER No. 839. the INTERBOROUGH RAPID TRANSIT COMNovember 13, 1908. PANY in respect of the Placing and Maintenance of Vending and Weighing Machines in the Brooklyn-Manhattan Rapid Transit Railroad. It is hereby Ordered, That a hearing be had on the 25th day of November, 1908, at 2:30 o'clock in the afternoon, or at any time or times to which the same may be adjourned, at the rooms of the Commission, No. 154 Nassau street, borough of Manhattan, city and State of New York, to inquire whether the regulations, practices, equipment, appliances or service of Interborough Rapid Transit Company in or upon the rapid transit subway railroad operated by it between a point near the general post office in the borough of Manhattan and the Long Island railroad station in the borough of Brooklyn, in respect of the placing and maintenance of vending and weighing machines within such subway are unjust, unreasonable, unsafe, improper or inadequate and if it be so found, then to determine whether changes in such regulations, practices, equipment, appliances or service at the place or places herein mentioned will be just, reasonable, safe, adequate and proper and whether changes should be put in force, observed and used on the line of said company, and also to inquire and determine whether repairs, improvements, changes or additions to or in the tracks, switches, terminals, terminal facilities or other property or device used by said company in respect of the matters mentioned, ought reasonably to be made to promote the security or convenience of the public or employees, or in order to secure adequate facilities for the transportation of passengers, freight or property. It is Further ordered, That the said Interborough Rapid Transit Company be given at least five days' notice of such hearing by service upon it, either personally or by mail, of a certified copy of this order and that at such hearing said company be afforded all reasonable opportunity for presenting evidence and examining and crossexamining witnesses as to the matters hereinbefore set forth. Hearings were held November 25th, 27th, and December 2d. Interborough Rapid Transit Company.-Lack of destination signs in subway trains. Case 1005, Complaint Order. COMPLAINT OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMIT- against INTERBOROUGH RAPID TRANSIT COMPANY. Complaint Order (see form, note 1) issued December 1st. Interborough Rapid Transit Company.— Advisability of building a subway station at or near One Hundred and Ninetieth street on the Broadway division. In the Matter of the Hearing on motion of the Commission as to the advisability of building a subway station at or near One Hundred and Ninetieth street on the Broadway Division of the INTERBOROUGH RAPID TRANSIT COMPANY. CASE 1021, It is hereby ordered, That a hearing be had on January 6, 1909, at 4 o'clock in the afternoon, or at any time or times to which the same may be adjourned, at the rooms of the Commission, at Number 154, Nassau street, borough of Manhattan, city and State of New York, to inquire into the advisability of the building of a subway station at or near One Hundred and Ninetieth street on the Broadway Division. Interborough Rapid Transit Company.- Suggested change of name of the subway station at Sixty-sixth street to "Lincoln Square." In the Matter Hearing on motion of the Commission on the question of the suggested change of name by the INTERBOROUGH RAPID TRANSIT COMPANY of the subway station at Sixty-sixth street to Lincoln square. CASE No. 1023. It is hereby ordered, That a hearing be had on the 13th day of January, 1909, at 4 o'clock in the afternoon, or at any time or times to which the same may be adjourned. at the rooms of the Commission, at Number 154 Nassau street, borough of Manhattan, city and State of New York, to inquire into the question of the suggested change of name of the subway station at West Sixty-sixth street to Lincoln Square. Further ordered, That the Interborough Rapid Transit Company be given at least ten days' notice of such hearing by service upon it, either personally or by mail, of a certified copy of this order. Interborough Rapid Transit Company. Steinway Tunnel.Proposal that the city of New York should purchase. In February, 1908, the Senate passed a resolution concurred in by the Assembly requesting information as to what steps the Commission has taken towards the speedy operation of the Steinway tunnel. The following reply was sent thereto : LETTER OF CHAIRMAN WILLCOX, New York, February 19, 1908. To the Honorable, the Senate of the State of New York: The Public Service Commission for the First District respectfully submits herewith its reply to the resolution of the Senate, dated February 5, 1908, concurred in by the Assembly February 12, 1908, received by the Commission February 14, 1908, requesting information as to what steps the Commission has taken towards the speedy operation of the Steinway Tunnel, and any other information received by the Commission in connection therewith. The so-called Steinway Tunnel has been constructed by the New York and Long Island Railroad Company and financed by the Interborough Rapid Transit Company, which controls the tunnel company through stock ownership. The city of New York and the New York and Long Island Railroad Company have been engaged in litigation since February, 1906, over the right of the company to construct this tunnel. The city claimed that the company was not a legal corporation; that it had no right to construct the tunnel; that even if it ever were a lawful corporation its corporate existence and powers ceased on January 1, 1907; and that its New York City franchises also expired at the same time. In passing upon the claim of the city, Mr. Justice Davis, of the Supreme Court, in an opinion rendered December 9, 1907, said: "The failure of the defendant to comply with the Railroad Law as to completion and operation of the railroad was ipso facto an extinction of the corporation, and it does not require the bringing of an action to dissolve the corporation (Matter of Brooklyn, Winfield & Newtown R'y, 72 N. Y., 245). And the so-called franchises mentioned in the complaint were immediately extinguished (see Brooklyn, Q. Co. & Sub. R. R., 185 N. Y., 185). "It thus appears from the complaint that the action is brought against a defendant that has no existence. The defendant being dead in the sense referred to above there can be no pleading to the complaint on behalf of that defend ant. I do not agree with the demurrant's view that the property rights and franchises mentioned in the complaint survive the extinction of the defendant's corporate existence and pass to the directors as trustees for the benefit of those concerned, and that these trustees are the proper parties defendant. If this were so the trustees might take their own time to build the road and thus defeat the very purpose of the statute to insure a speedy completion of the work for public uses (Matter of B'klyn, Q. Co. & Sub. R. R., 185 N. Y., 171, 185). My conclusion is that the demurrer is not properly interposed and has no standing in the case. The demurrer really admits that there is no defendant here. As a matter of fact there is no action pending, nor was there at the time the demurrer was served. Submit decision and judgment in accordance with these views." An appeal in one of the actions between the city and the company is now on the calendar of the Court of Appeals and may be argued within the next two months. The entire litigation on behalf of the city is in the hands of the Corporation Counsel. More detailed information in relation to this tunnel and to the matters in controversy will be found in the report herewith transmitted, entitled "The Steinway Tunnel." If the New York and Long Island Railroad Company has forfeited its corporate rights and franchises, the Commission is without present power to compel the operation of the tunnel, and pending the final determination of the rights of the parties to the litigation any attempt to do so would be premature and improper. Respectfully yours, The tunnel extending from Manhattan to Queens, along the line of Forty-second street, commonly called the "Steinway Tunnel," has been constructed by a private company, and is not a part of the rapid transit system laid out by the Public Service Commission, or its predecessors. No application has been made to the Commission, under any section of the Public Service Commissions Law, by the owners of the tunnel, and no proposition looking towards the granting of a franchise to operate has been presented to the Commission for consideration. But the present situation is so peculiar and so many inquiries have been made at the office of the Commission that a statement of the facts up to December 31, 1907, may be of interest and value. Origin of the Company. The tunnel was originally begun by the New York and Long Island Railroad Company, which was incorporated July 30, 1887, under chapter 140 of the Laws of 1850, known as the General Railroad Act, and the amendments thereto. The articles of association provided that the company was to continue in existence for ninety-nine (99) years; that the capital stock was to be $100,000, consisting of 1,000 shares, at $100 each, and that a railroad was to be constructed and operated about five miles in length, extending from a point near Borden avenue, Queens, one mile from the East river; thence under the river and under certain streets and lands in Manhattan to a connection with the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad at or near the intersection of Ninth avenue and Thirtieth street, New York city, with a branch northerly to connect with the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad, near the Grand Central depot, and a branch southerly to connect with the Hudson River tunnel in the vicinity of Washington square. The General Railroad Act of 1850 was amended by chapter 775 of the Laws of 1867, which provided, among other things, that if any corporation organized under tae Act of 1850, "shall not, within five years after its articles of association are filed and recorded in the office of the Secretary of State, begin the construction of its road, and expend thereon ten per cent on the amount of its capital, or shall not finish its road and put it in operation in ten years from the time of filing its articles of of association, as aforesaid, its corporate existence and powers shall cease." Work not completed. It therefore became incumbent upon the New York and Long Island Railroad Company to have begun construction of the tunnel and to have expended thereon $10,000 by July 30, 1892, and to have finished it and put it in operation by July 30, 1897, under penalty of forfeiture of its corporate existence and powers. The company's contractor started work in May, 1892, and it is claimed that up to July 30 of that year the sum of $11,718.33 had been expended. Work continued down to December, 1892, when an explosion occurred, and for nearly thirteen years nothing further was accomplished. In resuming operations in 1905, eight years after the charter would have expired, under the Law of 1867, above quoted, the company relied upon a series of acts, the last of which, adopted in 1903, is claimed to have extended until January 1, 1907, the time within which the road should have been finished and put in operation. As a matter of fact, the tunnel was not finished and put in operation by this date. |