DECISIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE REFERENCES. I. REPORT OF THE BOARD ON THE BILL ENTITLED "AN ACT TO REGULATE THE PAYMENT OF FARES UPON RAILROADS," REFERRED TO IT BY THE GOVERNOR. To the Governor of the State of New York: ALBANY, February 20, 1889. The Board of Railroad Commissioners respectfully returns Senate bill (printed No. 158) entitled "An Act to regulate the payment of fares upon railroads.' The bill provides that it shall be lawful for any company owning or operating a steam railroad in this State to collect an excess charge of ten cents over the regular established rate of fare from any passenger who pays fare in the car in which he or she may have taken passage, except where such passage is wholly within the limits of any incorporated city in this State; provided, however, that it shall be the duty of such company to give to any passenger paying such excess a receipt or other evidence of such payment, and which shall legibly state that it entitles the holder thereof to have such excess charge refunded upon the delivery of the same at any ticket office of such company upon the line of their railroad, and such company shall refund the same upon demand, and, provided further, that this act shall not apply to any passenger taking passage from a station or stopping-place where tickets can not be purchased during half an hour previous to the schedule time for the departure of the train on which such passenger takes passage. The passage of this act is urged by the railroad corporations. It is claimed that in the absence of some receipt of value being given to a passenger for the payment of the fare, that many fares paid fail to reach the treasury of the company. Railroad corporations generally require that a conductor shall record on a book which he carries in his pocket, the amount of fare received from the passenger, and shall give the passenger himself a receipt for the payment of such fare. Inasmuch, however, as the receipt for such fare has no value, a passenger is not likely to demand it; consequently a conductor who is disposed to be dishonest may fail to deliver to such passenger a receipt or mark the receipt of such cash upon his book, and no record, therefore, would exist of its ever having been paid. It is claimed very considerable revenues of the companies of the State are thus misdirected. In case this bill becomes a law, however, the exaction of ten cents additional fare would compel the entry by the conductor in his book of the receipt of such fare, and a much more trustworthy check would, therefore, be imposed upon conductors to return the full amount of cash fares collected to the company. No serious inconvenience would be imposed upon the passenger, as the receipt for the ten cents is redeemable at any time, there being no limitation imposed by the bill. It is claimed that some inconvenience might arise to passengers who arrive at a station just in time to take the train and not in time, perhaps, to purchase a ticket. The answer to this appears to be that it is the duty of the passenger to arrive within sufficient time to conform to the reasonable rules of the company, and that if he is thus almost late, it is not a serious hardship that he should be subjected to the slight inconvenience of redeeming a receipt for the extra ten cents fare which he would thus be obliged to procure. A custom has been in vogue upon several railroads of the State for some time, requiring passengers to thus pay an extra fare, although there is no authority in law for the same, except that it might be implied from the authority to impose proper and reasonable regulations. In the case of the New York Central railroad, special authority to exact five cents extra fare is granted by chapter 228 of the Laws of 1857. This extra sum, however, is not recoverable by the passenger. It may be proper to say that this bill has been opposed before the Board by the representative of the Order of Railway Conductors. The grounds for opposition were partially on a misapprehension of the scope of the bill and need not, therefore, be noted here. The principal ground of the opposition appears to be a belief upon the part of the representative of this organization that the passage of the bill would have a tendency to lead the public to believe that railway conductors were dishonest and not to be trusted financially. The Board does not deem that the order of Railway Conductors should object to a check thus being thrown about their cash receipts any more than that any other men, ticket agents, treasurers and financial officers should be obliged to give vouchers for receipts of money. It is universally the case that such vouchers should be given. The Board deems, therefore, that the measure might properly receive Executive approval, but it ventures to call attention to the fact that bills granting increased privileges to railroad corporations. seems to pass without difficulty, whereas any restrictive or remedial measure, however necessary or expedient in the interests of the public, rarely reaches the Executive. By the Board. WILLIAM C. HUDSON, Secretary, II. REPORT OF THE BOARD ON THE BILL ENTITLED "AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 14, To the Governor of the State of New York: ALBANY, March 12, 1889. The Board of Railroad Commissioners respectfully returns Assembly bill (printed No. 120) entitled "An act to amend section 14 of chapter 140 of the Laws of 1850, entitled 'An act to authorize the formation of railroad corporations and to regulate the same,' and to repeal chapter 515 of the Laws of 1867, entitled 'An act in relation to railroad corporations."" This act amends section fourteen of the General Act in two substantial respects. First. Section fourteen of the General Act now provides that for the purpose of acquiring title to real estate the company may present a petition to the Supreme Court praying for the appointment of commissioners, which petition, among other things, must state "that the whole capital stock of the company has been in good faith subscribed as required by this act." Chapter 515 of the Laws of 1867 modifies this requirement to the extent that any railroad company which has been or may hereafter be duly formed under the General Act, and which is duly continued in existence, may apply to the court for the appointment of commissioners to condemn land when at least $10,000 for every mile of its railroad proposed to be constructed in this State shall be in good faith subscribed to its capital stock, and ten per cent thereof paid in. This bill in line thirteen, page two of the printed bill, incorporates the law of 1867 into section fourteen of the General Act. The words ought to be in italics, but through some oversight they are not. The incorporation of the law of 1867 into section fourteen of the General Act is in the line of good legislation, as it simplifies the law. It furthermore does away with the objection which the Board raised to a similar bill which passed the Legislature last year and was referred to this Board by yourself, a report of which will be found on page 87 of volume one of the last report of this Board, viz., that for 1888, and to which your attention is respectfully drawn. The objection, in brief, was that the reenactment of section fourteen of the General Act might repeal this very law of 1867. Its incorporation, however, into the act obviates that objection. Second. The second amendment is to the effect that whereas a railroad o a greater length than one hundred miles, or one having two tracks, shall be obliged to have ten thousand dollars a mile subscribed and ten per cent thereof paid in before taking proceedings to condemn real estate, a railroad company "which has been or which may hereafter be duly organized under this act, and which is duly continued in existence for the purpose of constructing, maintaining and operating a railroad with a single track not exceeding one hundred miles in length, the petition must state that at least five thousand dollars for every mile of its railroad proposed to be constructed in this State have been in good faith subscribed to its capital stock and twenty per cent thereof paid in." It will thus be seen that the amount necessary to be paid in before proceedings can be taken to condemn real estate is the same in both cases, the only difference being that in one case ten thousand dollars must be subscribed and ten per cent paid in, while in the other five thousand dollars must be subscribed and twenty per cent paid in. Last year, in the report herein before alluded to, the Board states "that it is of the opinion that the proposed amendment, so far as it applies to single track railroads of fifty miles in length, would be a desirable amendment to the law, as there is no reason why, if these roads can be built for five thousand dollars a mile, that the incorporators of the company should be required to subscribe ten thousand dollars." The Board observes that this year the length of the excepted roads has just been doubled, and the provisions instead of applying to roads of fifty miles in length, as in the bill of last year, apply to roads of one hundred miles. The Board is not aware of any reason why the provisions of the act might not as well apply to roads of one hundred miles in length as those fifty miles in length. The application would probably be limited to but few roads under any circumstances. In addition to the substantial amendments above noted there are two further amendments to the law as follows: In subdivision two, line 57, page three of the printed bill the words "in the State paper are stricken out and the words "as required by law" substituted. The same amendment is made in subdivision five on line 82 of page four of the printed bill. This amendment is made in those provisions of the law with regard to serving notices upon non-residents. Inasmuch as the State paper was abolished by chapter 133 of the Laws of 1884, the provision that the notice should be put in the State paper was inoperative. The substitution of the words "as required by law" might raise some question as to where the notice should be printed in addition to a paper printed in the county in which the land is situated. It is not likely that this would cause any serious embarrassment, but it probably would have been better if the words "in the State paper" had simply been stricken out. Section two of the bill repeals chapter 515 of the Laws of 1867. Inasmuch, however, as the provisions of that statute are incorporated into section one of the bill, as herein before stated, the repealing clause is proper. On the whole, the Board deems that the bill can receive Executive approval without detriment to public interests. By the Board. WILLIAM C. HUDSON, Secretary. III. 7 REPORT OF THE BOARD ON THE BILL ENTITLED "AN ACT TO AMEND CHAPTER 616, LAWS OF 1887, entitled STEAM PASSENGER CARS,' ,,, To the Governor of the State of New York: ALBANY, March 20, 1889. The Board here with respectfully returns Senate bill (printed No. 191) entitled "An act to amend chapter 616 of the Laws of 1887, entitled 'An act to regulate the heating of steam passenger cars,' etc., sent to the Board under a re-reference. It appears that it has been proposed to insert the following amendment: " Except that where such foreign railroad connects with a railroad operated in this State and the cars of the latter railroad are equipped with apparatus for the use of steam from the locomotive for heating purposes such foreign railroad shall apply steam for said purposes to such cars so equipped." The object of this proposed amendment is to require the Grand Trunk Railroad of Canada to equip its locomotives with steam connections for passenger cars so that it shall enable the cars of the Delaware and Hudson Canal Company to be heated by steam from the locomotive when exchanged with the Grand Trunk Railroad at Rouse's Point. Rouse's Point is but a mile from the boundary line between Canada and New York State. The only jurisdiction that the State could have over the Grand Trunk road would be upon this mile of line. It is quite possible that if the State should insist that the Grand Trunk road should equip its locomotives with steam apparatus it might decline to enter the State and make its connections, if it made them at all, with the Delaware and Hudson Canal Company beyond the State boundary line which would subject the traveling public to very great inconvenience. It is probable, however, that the Grand Trunk road, if requested by the Delaware and Hudson Canal Company, would be willing to equip its locomotives hauling the trains of the Delaware and Hudson Canal Company with the steam apparatus. It would be a very trifling expense. - The Board deems, therefore, that it would be more expedient at present not to pass legislation on the subject. The counsel of the Delaware and Hudson Canal Company, Mr. Edwin Young, has sent a communication to the Board, the latter part of which is as follows: "We will withdraw our opposition for the present with the understanding that if it turns out that the bill works a hardship on this company by reason of the refusal of the Grand Trunk road to furnish steam or otherwise, the Board will assist us in securing relief by application to the Grand Trunk road or by recommending, if necessary, the amendment or modification of the bill by another Legislature." This the Board is quite willing to promise. For the above recited reasons the Board deems that the bill in its present shape, without amendment, can with propriety and without detriment to public interests, receive Executive approval. By the Board. WILLIAM C. HUDSON, Secretary. |