|
SCRIBNER'S
MAGAZINE · MAY/
JUNE, 1892. pp. 567-578 (Part I) and 743-758
(part II)
Rapid Transit In Cities
By Thomas Curtis Clarke
I. THE PROBLEM.
One of the most powerful factors in the evolution of
cities, and one of the most interesting topics of the day, is rapid
transit. It affects not only the health and comfort of all citizens,
but the very existence and prosperity of cities themselves. Although
much has been written about it, the last word has not been said.
Modern inventions do not change human nature, but they do
change human affairs. When the Lord put it into the mind of someone
"to pave the roads with iron bars" -as Emerson hath it- a new epoch
began, that of the railway system, which, although but sixty years
old, has changed the face of the world.
Rapid transit in cities was born about the same time,
when, in 1834, John Stephenson, of New York, invented the horse-car to
run on tramways, or flat rails, laid in the streets of our cities.
For this his name is worthy to be placed beside that other Stephenson,
who found the locomotive a toy and left it a perfect machine.
We are now just beginning to see the far-reaching effects
of this simple invention. It has solved the problem of city life. It
is fast abolishing the horrors of the crowded tenement. It is
shortening the hours of labor. It makes the poor man a land-holder. It
is doing more to put down socialism, in this country at least, than
all other things combined.
One of its effects is giving great trouble. The better
the service of street railways, the faster does the city population
grow, the more do the people ride, and the greater is the congestion
of traffic, and the louder the complaints of the public. The demand
for rapid transit facilities increases faster than the supply.
Everybody thinks that their own city is in the worst
plight, and the managers of their street railways are the meanest men
on the face of the earth ; but it is an interesting fact, and one
which has suggested these articles, that all large cities, where time
is of any value, are now in like distress.
Street lines, subways, elevated railways, and other means
of conveyance, have so greatly increased the population of cities, by
making the outlying districts available and accessible, that they
cannot carry the people who want to ride. This is not only the case in
the greater American cities, but also in Vienna, Berlin, Paris,
London, Liverpool, Glasgow, etc.
A comparative study of the conditions which have brought
about this congestion of traffic may suggest a remedy. In the present
article we shall discuss the problem; in the second, the solution.
The conflict between city people and those who live in
the country is as old as history. There always has been an influx from
without to within. So long as the area of cities was limited, this was
strongly and successfully resisted by the citizens. They felt
themselves a superior class to the rustics. The very words "urbane"
and "rustic" tell the story.
 |
| Jam of Street Cars at the Corner of
Madison and State Streets, Chicago. Drawn by Childe Hassam. |
The Romans called the outside dwellers "villmi;" from
which come two words, one of honorable significance, "villa," and the
other, perhaps a little modified by medieval use, "villain." Roman
citizens looked down upon the country folk as an average New Yorker
does upon a stray Jerseyman from the pines.
All literature has been tinged by this feeling, and both
writers and statesmen have continued to deplore the excessive growth
of cities as a national evil, and have exhorted countrymen to stay at
home, telling them how much better off they were in the country.
Observation has now taught us that this growth of cities
is a necessary part of the evolution of our social structure, and that
it is not a growth at the expense of the country, but for the benefit
of the country, as well as that of the city.
Recent statistical inquiries have shown that cities grow
because they absorb the beak and not the worst, of the rural
population, who better their condition by coming to town.
Charles Booth, the eminent English statistician, in his
great work, "Labor and Life of the People," has shown, from very
extended inquiry, that most of those who come to London from the
country either have work already engaged, or have good prospects of
getting work; and that their condition is generally improved by their
change of abode.
The British Census of 1890 confirms this in a striking
manner by showing that the people of country birth are most numerous
in the wealthy quarters of the city, where employment abounds, and
least numerous in the poverty-stricken quarters.
All this is contrary to the preconceived opinion that
countrymen wander aimlessly to the city, and are chiefly tramps, or
broken-down persons.
"Hark! the dogs do bark, The beggars are coming to town."
This is not so. The emigrants from the country to the
city, with exceptions, of course, are the bone and sinew of the rural
population, the most energetic and the best. They come to better
themselves, and they do better themselves. This is just as true, and
probably more so, of the United States as of England.
The significance of it is that the growth of cities will
never stop so long as means are given to bring people to them, and to
enable people to get about over their ever-increasing areas, without
too much loss of time, which is money. Railways- "the paving of the
roads with iron bars"- enable people of moderate means to travel to
the cities, and rapid transit facilities enable them to use the cities
when they get there.
Hence our cities have grown equally with our railways,
and almost directly as their mileage. This can be clearly seen from
the above diagram, compiled from the results of the United States
Census, It shows by curves the actual growth of the whole country, of
its cities, and of its railways during equal periods of time. It does
not show what is still more remarkable, the relative growth of cities
to that of the whole. In 1790, the total city population was 3.35 per
cent. of the whole. One hundred years after, it is 29.12 per cent. The
mileage of steam railways has increased from 23 miles in 1830, to
161,000 miles in 1890; and the mileage of steel railways,from nothing
in 1834, to 10,500 miles in 1890-91.
It seems to be evident that there is no limit to the
growth of cities, except the difficulty of getting about in them.
There are two ways of solving this problem: One is to build very lofty
buildings, and crowd many families under one roof. The other is to
take people quickly to and from the outlying districts by rapid
transit.
The cities of sixty years ago were of such small area
that people could walk to and from their daily work without much loss
of time. Nobody seemed to be in a hurry in those days, and life went
on very easily and smoothly.
As population increased the poorer classes crowded into
tenements, so as to be near their daily work. These tenements were
generally old buildings, whose rooms were cut up into smaller
ones. They lacked light and air, and had no sanitary
conveniences. Philanthropists spent much money in trying to improve
these buildings and make them fit for self-respecting people to live
in.
But this is beginning at the wrong end. The new tenements
are, it is true, occupied by a better class of people; but the vicious
and degraded poor, being driven out of their old quarters, fall into
worse ones, where crowding is increased on account of space having
been taken away to build better buildings upon. The true remedy is to
enable people to go to where there is more room, and go quickly and
cheaply. In this country this mode of relief first came from
Stephenson's street-cars drawn by horses, which have spread thence all
over the world.
Next came cable-lines, invented some twenty years since
in San Francisco, to overcome the steep grades of their streets, by
A. S. Hallidie, whose name has not received the credit which this very
important improvement deserves.
The latest and greatest invention is the electric trolley
system. This is so simple, inexpensive, reliable, and safe, that it
has "come to stay," in spite of the opposition of those conservatives,
who are the sons and grandsons of those older conservatives who
bitterly opposed horse-railways, but who fortunately failed to prevent
their adoption.
The locomotive, the horse of the people, was opposed, and
the street-car, the carriage of the people, was opposed; but that
which is for the greatest good of the greatest number will always
conquer in the end.
While it may be admitted that overhead trolley wires are
unsightly, and not well suited to the closely built up parts of
cities, there can be no objection to them in the outlying
districts. Their economy is their chief merit, as this makes the
system a flexible one, which can be extended to meet the wants of the
public much faster than any conduit system, either for electric wires,
or for cables.
European cities, while employing surface tramway cars
drawn by horses, and subways, both steam and electric, rely largely
for getting about upon the omnibus.
As a means of rapid transit this is inferior to the
street-car, but the fact that the latter glides along on its smooth
pavement of iron bars, makes the public oblivious of the wretched
state of the stone pavements on either side. The "bus," to get any
speed, must have a smooth pavement all over the street, and this is
one reason why European cities are so much better paved than those of
our country.
Horse-cars rather more than double the available area of
a city, and for a time there is relief. Population increases, and a
wider area can only be got by higher speed. Then come the cable and
electric cars, which increase the speed in the congested streets very
little, but in the outer districts from six to ten or twelve miles per
hour. This quadruples the original city area, without taking any more
of the people's time in riding.
It may be truly said that all the efforts of
trades-unions, assisted by legislation, to shorten the hours of labor,
have not accomplished so much as the simple device of "paving the
roads with iron bars."
After a while the ever-increasing traffic puts an end to
this relief, and the only thing to be done in the congested parts of
the city is to go above ground on elevated railways, or below ground
in subways. But, as we see to-day in New York, and in London and other
European cities, this relief does not last, unless the number of these
lines is constantly increased. We win illustrate it in detail the
experience of these and other cities.
Maps of Berlin, Paris, London, and Boston, covering in
each case an area five miles wide, by eight miles long, appear in this
article; and in the second article there will be maps of New York and
Chicago, covering ten miles wide by sixteen miles long.
 |
 |
| Map of Berlin, showing the Belt and
Transverse Lines. |
The Berlin Viaduct Railway. [From the
Engineering Record, New York.] |
The distribution of the population is such that the
census numbers of these cities correspond nearly with the areas,
except in the case of Boston, whose population would be largely
increased if the whole amount included in the area of the map were
included. The space occupied by New York is so much encroached upon by
water, that the area for future growth of population lies even beyond
the limits of the map. If the whole area of Chicago were as thickly
populated as the central parts of that city, its population would
exceed that of New York. From all of these maps one can see what is
meant by the congested districts, and where the outer and as yet
thinly populated districts lie, access to which can be given by rapid
transit facilities.
We have given no map of Vienna, because it has no rapid
transit, and only refer to it to show the great cost of modernizing an
ancient city. It is proposed to build an outer belt-line connecting
the railway stations for through passengers and freight; then an inner
belt for local traffic, also two radial lines dividing the inner
circle into quadrants for local, traffic. These lines, together with
some new sewage works, and works for the control of the river, and a
winter harbor, are estimated to cost $85,000,000, which will be
divided between the city, the province of Lower Austria, and the
Empire.
Here the whole burden of the rapid transit is to be
assumed by the community, and private capital is called upon only to
purchase bonds.
The city of Berlin, the modern capital of the German
Empire, with a population of over one million three hundred thousand,
is now probably better supplied with facilities for rapid transit than
any other European city, but more are wanted, and are now about to be
built.
The topography of this city offers excellent
facilities. Berlin lies on a level plain and can be extended in all
directions. The little river Spree is too small to stand in the way of
the necessary works. What a different state of things this is from
that of New York, where it was once proposed to fill up the East
River, and where it is now seriously proposed to fill up the Harlem
River!
The first step that was taken in Berlin was to connect
the outlying railway stations by a Ringbahn, or belt-line. While this
was very useful for transferring freight, it carried but few
passengers, as it did not follow the lines of the great streets along
which people go and come.
Tramway, or horse-car, lines were then laid, running
radially from the centre of the city to its suburbs. The system is one
of the largest in Europe, having one hundred and eighty miles of
single track, and carrying one hundred and twenty-one million
passengers annually.
The next step was to build the famous Stadtbabn, or
Viaduct line, which crosses the long diameter of the oval formed by
the belt railway. It is seven and a half miles long, has two tracks
for express and two for local trains, is built in the most solid
manner of stone and iron, and cost, including land, $16,000,000. But
it carried last year only about fifteen million passengers, which is
less than the comparatively insignificant Ninth Avenue Elevated of New
York carries.
All these facilities for rapid transit have not been
found sufficient, and it is now proposed to again divide the oval
area, to which everybody wishes to go, by two lines of subways
crossing each other at right angles. These quadrants will also be
traversed by two small belts, dividing the greater oval into three
divisions.
All of these lines will be laid out under the principal
thoroughfares. They will consist of two small iron tubes like
Greathead's South London Subway, having elevators capable of carrying
forty or fifty passengers, which will be placed at the
stations. Berlin is an illustration of the never-ending demands of
rapid transit. Better facilities increase travel, and then more
facilities are wanted, and so on, ad infinitum, so far as we can now
see.
 |
| The South London Subway. (Showing
Stockwell Station, the lift, platform, and carriages.) |
The city of Paris, with a population of about two million
two hundred thousand, is in the first stage of rapid transit. She has
a ceinture or belt railway connecting the principal railway terminal
stations, but like the outer belt of Berlin, it handles freight
chiefly, and but few passengers. Tramway cars, omnibuses, and cabs
give other means of rapid transit. The poorest people walk, and those
who are a little better off ride in tramway-cars and omnibuses. These
being owned by commercial companies and worked for profit, always run
on the lines of the great streets.
It is admitted that more and better facilities are
wanted, and several plans have been proposed. One is to build elevated
railways in the streets like those of New York. This meets with great
opposition. Another plan is to open a new street or avenue running
near the longer diameter of the oval formed by the belt railway, one
hundred and seventy feet wide. In the centre of this there would be
placed a four-track viaduct, having streets sixty feet wide on each
side. The right of way is estimated to cost four and a half millions
of dollars per mile, and the whole cost of thirteen miles would be
eighty millions of dollars.
This amount deters private capital from undertaking the
scheme, but here seems to be an excellent opportunity for the
community to share the burden of rapid transit with private investors.
The city of Paris can condemn land wider than that necessary for this
scheme, and sell it at a profit sufficient to repay a large part of
the cost, as was done in the case of the new boulevards built by
Haussman in the time of the Empire, and of the Avenue de l'Opera,
since.
Some electric subways on the Greathead system are also
proposed. They will be very small, only eighteen feet in diameter, to
carry two lines of rails, and will be worked by electric power. They
are intended to run from the Arc de Triomphe along the Champs-Elysees,
the rue de Rivoli, with a return loop along the grand boulevards; that
is to say, they coincide with the lines of greatest traffic. Their
depth will not require elevators, and it is estimated that they will
cost but eleven millions of dollars, which seems a very insufficient
sum. Even were it doubled or trebled, it would be less than half of a
viaduct line of the same length. This is one advantage of the subway
system if made of these small round tubes. Another very great
advantage is that the subway system can always follow the lines of the
great thoroughfares, without destroying valuable property.
Another plan of rapid transit is proposed by the eminent
engineer, Eiffel, which differs from any others in proposing to
construct a line partly in subways and partly on viaducts, the two
being united by inclined planes.
 |
| Map of Paris, showing Existing and
Proposed Lines of Rapid Transit. |
This line is a little less than seven miles long, and
runs around and through the heart of Paris, where the circulation of
people is greatest. It runs from the Church of the Madeleine along the
Grand Boulevard to the Southern Railway station, then crosses the
Seine to the Orleans station, recrosses near the Hotel de Ville, and
runs under the rue de Rivoli to the place of beginning. It is proposed
to operate it by locomotives that consume their own smoke. About
one-third is above ground and two-thirds in subway. The cost is
estimated at $15,000,000, and the yearly traffic at forty-five
millions of passengers.
The total movement of passengers for the year 1888 was as
follows:
| By omnibus | 109,068,000 |
| tramways | 132,362,000 |
| river steamers | 15,064,000 |
| central railway | 18,088,000 |
| cabs | 14,000,000 |
| Total | 288,582,000 |
which, for a population of 2,200,000, gives 130 trips for
each person yearly. During the year of the Exposition, 1889, the
total movement was 340,000,000, an increase of about seventeen per
cent. (For these statistics we are indebted to E. Pontzen. Civil
Engineer.)
Rapid transit in London began as elsewhere, with a belt
connecting its principal terminal stations. These are the famous
"Metropolitan" and "District" underground lines. The Metropolitan lies
near and parallel with the river Thames, and fortunately near one of
the great lines of traffic between London and the West End. The
District follows the northern line of the oval belt, and still farther
north is another line called the "Outer Circle." Trains run around all
these belt lines, connecting the railway stations, and branching out
into the country radially in many directions.
In spite of all this their business is small compared to
that of the New York elevated lines, and not enough to pay interest on
the investment. The travel is very small considering the great
population of London.
The reason of this was explained by the general manager
of these lines to the Boston Rapid Transit commissioner, Mr.
Fitzgerald, in 1891. Said he, "We labor under the disadvantage of
having our stations too far removed from the business streets of the
city, thus losing the immense local traffic. Such roads as ours should
be built on the lines of the great thoroughfares."
The South London Subway, built by Mr. Greathead, is
another example of bad location. It merely carries passengers from a
single outlying district called Kennington to the city, and has only a
morning and evening business, and no local traffic.
Experience having shown the effects of bad location, a
new company, called the "Central London," has just received a charter
from Parliament. This cuts the oval across its longer diameter, and
follows the lines of those very crowded thoroughfares, Oxford Street,
Holborn, Cheapside, and Cornhill down to the East End of London. It
will consist of two tubes thirteen feet in diameter, made by the
Greathead process, and it will be run as that is, by electric
power. Sir Benjamin Baker is the engineer, and he estimates that it
can be built for about two million dollars per mile, and that it will
carry fifty-two millions of passengers soon after opening for traffic.
 |
| Map of London, showing Existing and
Proposed Lines of Rapid Transit. |
Besides this there are other electric lines of a similar
character proposed to run across the short diameter of the oval, and
connect the great railway stations on the north of London with those
on the south by direct lines, instead of running a long distance
around. These lines will all be under crowded streets.
The Metropolitan subway line was opened in 1862, and the
District and some tramway lines completed in 1870. In 1862 the London
General Omnibus Company carried forty-one millions of passengers. In
1884 it carried seventy-six millions, while the two subways carried
one hundred and fourteen and a half millions - a total of one hundred
and ninety and a half millions. In 1889-90 the movement was:
| By tramways, omnibuses, and underground railways, within five miles radius | 453,000,000 |
| By suburban steam railways, within ten miles radius | 535,000,000 |
| Total | 988,000,000 |
which gives 186 yearly trips for each inhabitant.
This brief account of rapid transit in European cities
shows that their experience has been very similar. First they build a
belt railway, which does little for rapid transit. Then they cross the
circle or oval in various directions, by lines radiating from centre,
and always following the lines of the crowded streets, which the first
system did not do. Sometimes they build a smaller circle inside of the
larger one, but always on the lines where people come and go. The more
of these facilities that are given, the more the public demand, and
the more they get.
The original idea that there was a certain district of a
city too sacred to be invaded by rapid transit lines, has now
disappeared. It is found that this district is one to which people
insist on being carried. There are but two ways of getting there. One
is by a viaduct system, which is too costly for private capital alone,
but which can be built if the community are willing to help. The
advantages of riding above ground in the dear air of day need not be
enlarged upon.
The other system is to build subways below the
surface. If it be attempted to keep very near the surface and dispense
with elevators, the difficulties and cost are largely increased. But
if the subways are placed below all pipes, sewers, and foundations,
and are made of small size, then the construction becomes as
economical as that of a viaduct above ground, but without requiring
expensive right of way. This is the system that now seems to be in
favor in European cities.
The manner in which rapid transit facilities increase
rapid transit is well illustrated by New York. Before 1834 the bulk of
its population lived below Fourteenth Street, and all business was
done below Canal Street. The invention of the horse-car in that year
extended the area of population northward, while the ferry-boats built
up Brooklyn and Jersey City. Surface lines were followed by elevated
lines in 1878, and now the people cry loudly for more means of rapid
transit.
The following table shows the double growth-that due to
increased population and that due to the increased mobility of the
people:
| Year | Population | Yearly fares or passengers | Number of trips per each person yearly |
| 1884 | 515,000 | 6,836,000 | 13 |
| 1865 | 990,000 | 82,000,000 | 83 |
| 1878 | 1,220,000 | 170,000,000 | 140 |
| 1890 | 1,650,000 | 405,000,000 | 248 |
In other cities the number of yearly trips per inhabitant
has increased greatly--in Chicago nearly as much as in New York, and
in Boston more so.
There must be added to the above number of passengers by
the New York lines, about two hundred millions more who come and go by
the ferries over the East and North Rivers, and the Brooklyn
Bridge. This makes a yearly movement of 600,000,000, or a daily one of
1,643,000 persons, over one-half of whom come and go to the small area
of New York island lying below Canal Street. The length of street-car
lines in New York is 130 miles, and of elevated lines 90 miles, making
220 miles in all. It is not strange that more rapid transit lines and
more bridges should be called for. A rapid transit commission has laid
out lines that we shall refer to here-after.
Boston jogged along for many years with slow, infrequent,
and shabby horse-cars. The lines were owned by different corporations,
and people could not change from the cars of one line to those of
another without paying extra fare. This, naturally enough, did not
encourage travel nor the growth of the city. But as neither streets
nor cars were uncomfortably crowded, some wise men of Boston said:
"Behold, how much better off we are than those wretched New Yorkers!"
 |
 |
| Map of Boston, showing existing and
proposed lines of rapid transit. |
The congested district of
Boston. (This map occupies the space enclosed by dotted line on the
Map of Boston.) |
Eminent citizens went to the Statehouse and opposed the
grant of more rapid transit facilities, on the ground that it was
better and healthier to walk than to ride. They did not stop to
consider that this would mean the increase of the crowded tenement
system with all its horrors.
But in an evil hour for the slow people, the seven
different horse-car systems who had attempted to carry the people,
were consolidated into one, called the West End Company."
The first benefit was single fares. Then came more
frequent cars. Then the electric system was introduced. At first it
was attempted to run the car motors by wires placed in conduits. It
was found that this led to all sorts of delays due to the loss of
current from induction and grounding. The small boy became an
important factor. He soon discovered that by dropping a forked wire
into the slot after dark, which should straddle the conductor and
touch the sides, he could short-circuit the current, and produce a
most beautiful display of green sparks. This also had the effect of
stopping every car on that division, which was still more delightful,
and makes some of us wish that similar opportunities had been offered
to us in our boyhood.
The city authorities of Boston wisely gave permission to
replace the conduits by overhead wires and trolleys - the "witches
broom" of Dr. Holmes's poem. Since then all has gone well.
The simplicity and economy of the system has allowed its
extension into the outlying districts, until there are now 245 miles
of single track, of which 81 miles is now electrically equipped, and
all soon will be. This is the longest system of any American city
except Philadelphia, which has 340 miles of single track.
The number of passengers carried has increased from
92,000,000 in 1887, the year of consolidation, to 119,000,000 in
1891. The population has increased in the same time from 425,000 to
451,000. This gives the yearly number of rides per inhabitant, 263.
There has been a movement of population from the inner to
the outer wards, where, as will be seen by the map, there is a great
deal of space yet unoccupied. The effect of this has been to replace
crowded tenement-houses by business structures.
The population of that larger Boston which lies just
outside the city limits, added to that within these limits, is
estimated at 800,000, or two-thirds that of Chicago. Half of these
people come to town every morning and go out at night, 327,000 by
street-cars, and 134,000 by steam railways, 461,000 in all. When we
consider how small the business part of Boston is, and bow narrow and
crooked her streets are, it is not strange that great congestion of
traffic has taken place. All the lines crossing the city must pass
through only three streets, and these become impassable during certain
hours, and much time is lost. A commission was appointed last year to
devise better means of rapid transit, whose recommendations we shall
refer to later.
 |
| The Crowd at Park Street Church,
Boston. Drawn by Childe Hassam, engraved by
W. B. Witte. |
Chicago finds herself to-day in the same trouble as the
other cities we have mentioned. Her street lines cannot carry her
people, and the soon-coming World's Fair will add many more to be
carried. The city is prevented from extending eastward by the lake,
and the congested business district is small in area, and cut off by
the rivers from the outer districts on two sides.
The steam railroads bring in many suburban passengers,
but this does not give rapid transit. No steam railway can do it
without separate tracks for the purpose, as it cannot run trains of
cars often enough, and people will leave a steam line and use cable or
electric cars, because there is no time-table to remember, and if they
miss one car, they know another will soon follow.
Also, there is too much time lost in going back and
forward from the stations to their homes. This time is saved on the
surface cars by their frequent stops.
Horse-car lines have been used for many years, but the
phenomenal growth of Chicago dates from the changing of these lines to
cable lines, some six or seven years since.
These cable lines are used as trunk lines on the great
thoroughfares, and horse-car lines branch from them. When the
horse-car reaches the main line it is coupled to the cable cars and
the passengers go on without change. The lines are allowed to run
trains of one grip-car and two trailers; each train can seat about
seventy passengers. These trains run five or six miles per hour in the
inner districts, but when they get out where the streets are less
crowded, the speed is more than doubled.
The excellence of this service has brought about the same
trouble as we have found to exist elsewhere - a great and constantly
increasing congestion of traffic. This may be understood from the
illustration on page 568, showing one of the principal streets of
Chicago crowded with cars at the end of the afternoon.
It is stated that during the morning and evening hours
there are not seats enough for more than half the people who
ride. They stand inside of the cars and on the end platforms, and even
hang upon the side platforms and steps, from which insecure places
they often fall, and sometimes are run over. In addition to these
dangers, street cars full of people are sometimes struck by the
locomotives, which ran on the same grade as the streets, and tossed
into the air as a bull would toss a baby-carriage on his horns.
Various remedies have been proposed for this dangerous
and uncomfortable state of affairs. The most obvious is to require all
the trunk lines coming into Chicago to elevate their tracks, which
will have to be done, notwithstanding its cost. Theorists say-pass a
law forbidding passengers to be taken unless given seats. This would
mean making half the people wait indefinitely, and public opinion
would not tolerate it. Another suggestion is that conductors should
be prohibited by law from taking fares except from seated passengers.
Then the companies would put on more cars. But, say experts, to crowd
more cars on the present cables would lead to greater delays in
getting around the loops, and be a source of danger in passing through
the tunnels. It is also found that if too many cars are run on one
cable, and more than a certain number happen to start at once, the
strain on the cable is too great and it breaks, causing peculiarly
vexatious delays. The only real remedy is more lines, surface,
elevated, or in subway.
A rapid transit commission has investigated the whole
subject and has made some very excellent suggestions, which, if
adopted, will give temporary relief. These we shall refer to
hereafter.
The present surface lines are carrying 567,000 persons
daily, the larger part to the congested district. During the World's
Fair there will be a probable addition of 200,000 going each way. The
present lines cannot carry them in addition to what they now
carry. Relief must come from the steam railroads, and from steamboats
running along the lakefront.
The movement in street and subway cars of the general
people in European cities, is much more sluggish than here. While in
Boston each person makes 263 trips per year; in New York, 248; in
Chicago, including the steam railways, 234; and even in Philadelphia,
160; we find that In Berlin there are but 104 trips yearly for each
person; in Paris, including cabs, 130 yearly trips; and in London, 186
trips.
The bulk of the people must walk, and to do this means
living in a state of great crowding. The reason why they do it is,
partly, that the lines are not located where people want to go, but
chiefly on account of the system of charging separate fares increasing
with the distance, and thus discriminating against the suburbs.
In Great Britain, tramway-car fares are limited by law to
a penny or two cents a mile, and this is charged, except when they
come in competition with omnibuses, which carry passengers four or
five miles for a penny. A penny a mile would mean ten cents from the
City Hall in New York to Harlem, or twelve cents from the City Hall of
Chicago to the World's Fair grounds.
In Paris the omnibuses and tram-cars charge six cents for
inside and three cents for outside passengers for distances under four
miles. In Berlin the fares are less, which accounts for the greater
movement of the people. They vary from two and a half cents for one
mile to ten cents for six miles. The average distance traveled is 1.9
miles and the average fare is 1.6 cents per mile. The average distance
traveled in Boston is 4.3 miles, and the average fare 1.2 cents per
mile. In New York it is about the same.
Averages are proverbially misleading. The real
difference between the European and the American systems is that here
a man can ride eight or ten miles, from the crowded part of the city
where he earns his living to the open and rural districts, for five
cents. In any European city it would cost him more than twice as much,
actually, and if a working-man, more than that in relation to his
yearly wages.
The effect there has been to crowd people into the middle
of a city. The effect here is to enable them to live in the fresh air
of the suburban districts, where they sometimes have room even for a
small garden. Certainly this is a result to be approved both by
economists and philanthropists.
The second effect of low single fares and quick transit
is, as I have shown, to increase the population, and to increase the
number of daily rides of each person, faster than capital has
generally been able to supply the demand. Hence the complaints which
seem to be universal in all large cities, where time is of value.
In the second of these articles I propose to suggest some
remedial measures, which will take a broader scope than if merely
confined to matters within the province of civil engineering.
I. THE SOLUTION.
A medieval city was a very picturesque object, with its
narrow and winding streets and overhanging houses, and the tall
cathedral towering above the market-place. As nobody rode, except here
and there "an abbot on an ambling pad," or a noble lady on her
palfrey, its area was small, and had to be kept small, so that people
could get over it on foot. Hence the strong aversion which we find
expressed in the literature and history of those times to the growth
of cities. Even as late as in Charles II's days, Sir Christopher Wren,
in making a new plan for London after its great fire, proposed to move
all the graveyards and arrange them in a ring around the city, for the
express purpose of preventing its enlargement.
People dwelt in all parts of these cities, and carried on
their trades, manufactures, and selling of goods under the same roofs
where they ate and slept. There are persons still living who have
heard it said that the proper place for a tradesman to live was over
his shop. But with the changes caused by modern inventions the
evolution of a city makes it more complex. Differentiation of parts
takes place. One part becomes the financial centre; another, that of
wholesale business; a third, that of manufactures; and a fourth, that
of retail shops; while the residence quarters are farther and farther
removed from the centre. These changes everyone must have noticed in
almost all cities, but few have paused to consider that this evolution
of the modern city comes from the extensive use now made of the sun's
energy stored up in coal, and utilized through machinery in all the
innumerable processes of manufacturing, industry, and
transportation. Cities depend upon coal mines. They have grown with
their growth, and prospered with their prosperity: and if ever the
mines become exhausted, the cities will dwindle with their decay;
unless we learn to transform the energy of the medium which surrounds
us into power.
We have shown that the growth of population and the habit
of riding in cars have increased faster than capital has been able to
supply the means of transit, from whence has come congestion of
traffic in the larger cities, and from whence it will come in all. The
evil has become serious, and is fast changing rapid transit back to
slow transit.
Various remedies have been suggested. Were it confined to
one or two cities, we might hesitate to advise. But the same causes
will produce similar effects in all of our cities, so that the matter
becomes one of universal interest. The extension of cable and
electric railways in cities like San Francisco, Denver, Kansas City,
Buffalo, Minneapolis, St. Paul, etc., is covering rapidly with houses
great areas of outlying territory, that were lately farms and
pastures. As everybody wishes to go to the heart of the city, which is
small, congestion of traffic must come sooner or later to all. The
question is not one of invention and engineering alone, but it is
interwoven with one of the most difficult problems of modem economic
science-how far shall the community control and share in the burden of
serving the community? We will take up this question farther on, and
will now discuss some of the engineering features of an improved rapid
transit.
An inspection of the maps of cities, in this and the
article in the May number, will show that the shape and contour of the
town, as determined by the physical features of land and water, has
much to do with the manner in which its rapid transit is
developed. Thus, the steep hills of San Francisco were the cause of
the invention of the cable system, which is also used in the steep
streets of Kansas City. The long, level, and straight avenues of
Chicago and New York, are also suitable to the cable system on account
of their concentrated traffic and absence of curves. The crooked and
narrow streets of Boston, with their frequent curving and
intersections, are not suited for cables, but are worked very well by
the electric system. Where there is a wide extent of sparsely settled
territory, the electric trolley system is the most economical of all.
The question is sometimes asked, what is the comparative
cost of working street railways by horses, cables, or electric motors?
The investigations of the last census throw light upon this, and I
have collected some other statistics showing the cost of carrying a
passenger, which is a resultant of the cost of running a car, and the
number of people in that car.
Table showing cost of operating Horse, Cable,
Electric, Steam, Locomotive Lines, per Car Mile run.
| Description |
Actual cost in cents per car mile run |
Fares per car mile run |
Cost per passenger |
| Motive Power |
Other Expenses |
Total |
| Horse Car Lines. |
| Census Bulletin No. 55-average of 15 lines | 7.10 | 11.06 | 18.16 | 4.95 | 3.67 |
| Chicago, Southside, 1891 | 12.00 | 6.90 | 18.90 | 5.03 | 4.64 |
| West End, Boston, 1891 | 10.86 | 14.69 | 25.55 | 6.35 | 4.02 |
| Bobtail cars drawn by one animal, with no conductor | 7.00 | 8.00 | 15.00 | .... | .... |
| Electric Lines. |
| West End, Boston, Trolley | 7.65 | 14.10 | 21.75 | 6.70 | 3.20 |
| Census Bulletin, average of 10 lines | 5.36 | 7.85 | 13.21 | 3.46 | 3.82 |
| South London Subway, 1891 | 5.20 | 8.10 | 13.30 | 5.00 | 2.70 |
| Cable Lines. |
| Census Bulletin, 10 lines | 3.40 | 10.72 | 14.12 | 4.30 | 3.22 |
| Chicago, Southside Cable, 1891 | 3.00 | 6.89 | 9.89 | 3.58 | 2.60 |
| Brooklyn Bridge Cable, 1887 | 2.23 | 10.87 | 13.10 | 8.85 | 1.50 |
| Brooklyn Bridge Cable, 1891 | 2.24 | 8.44 | 10.68 | 7.83 | 1.36 |
| Locomotive Elevated Lines. |
| Manhattan, N. Y., 1890 | 5.85 | 7.15 | 13.00 | 5.20 | 2.68 |
| Brooklyn, N. Y., 1890 | 5.00 | 4.54 | 9.54 | 3.17 | 3.00 |
Figures are misleading without explanation. Thus in the horse-car
lines, there is evidently a difference between the division of cost of
motive power and other expenses, in the roads given by the Census
Bulletin and in the other three. The West End of Boston, both in its
electric and horse-car statements, charges to the "other expenses"
some properly due to the cost of changing from horse to electric
power, which, after this is done, will disappear from the account.
After making all allowances, the result remains that cable power is
the least expensive to operate, then locomotives, then electric
motors, and the most expensive is that of horses. But all these
conclusions may be reversed when we take into account the interest
charges on the cost of the systems. According to the Census Bulletin
the total cost of road and equipment per mile of street length is for
| Horse, mule railways | $71,387 |
| Electric trolley railways | 46,697 |
| Cable trolley railways | 350,324 |
to which we may add subways, $1,200,000 to $1,600,000 per
mile; elevated railways, $600,000 to $800,000 per mile. The
conclusion is that each case should be considered on its own merits,
and where the traffic is light and diffused over wide areas, horse or
electric lines are best. Where the traffic is very concentrated cables
seem to give the best results, as on the Brooklyn Bridge. If, however,
electric lines with their present imperfect development can do either
heavy or light business economically, it is safe to assume that in
their future development they will beat all the others. In an ideally
perfect system of rapid transit:
- The lines should run from the business centre of the city in all
directions to the suburbs, like the spokes of a wheel, so far as the
physical features of land and water will admit.
- The lines should follow those streets which are already business
thoroughfares.
- The system should be one upon which cars can move with equal speed
in all parts of the city.
- No changes of cars should be necessary.
- The system should be a flexible one, capable of extension through
the outlying and thinly settled districts without too much cost.
The manner of carrying out this would be as follows:
Beginning in the suburbs, we should have the present electric or cable
surface railways; where there is not sufficient movement of ordinary
vehicles to prevent a progress of nine to ten miles per hour, or even
more. As soon as that part of the city is reached where a slower speed
becomes necessary, the cars should ascend upon an elevated railway and
run on it until either narrower streets, or any other reason, makes
this kind of line objectionable. Then the line should descend from
elevated to subway and pass under that part of the city where an
elevated line would be inadmissible. After passing this the line may
rise again to elevated and again descend to the street level. All
these changes would not always be necessary. There is no reason why
this cannot be done by either cable motors drawing trailing cars after
them, or by cars each carrying its own electric motor. Not only do
the smaller electric cars in Boston, but the great double-deck Pullman
car, carrying thirty passengers below, thirty on deck, ascend six per
cent. grades with ease. If it is desirable to run electric cars in
trains, each should be supplied with its own motor, and all be
connected and worked by one motorman at the end. It is true that the
wheels of the old horse-cars, which have small flanges, would not
allow them to run safely on an elevated structure. But safe wheels
could easily be made, and as a matter of fact, the wheels of the
double-deck Pullman street car are amply strong and safe enough.
Let us see the application of this suggestion to
practice. Take the city of Paris for example. Here the Metropolitan
Company projected by M. Eiffel does propose to ran partly underground
and partly on the surface. There is no physical difficulty in their
running also on elevated lines, if it is necessary. We have said that,
owing to the small size of its business centre, the city of Boston is
probably suffering more from congestion of traffic than any other
American city. The method of rapid transit which we have just
described is admirably adapted to give it relief. Through the broad
suburban streets the electric cars now move at the rate of eight to
ten miles an hour. The congestion of traffic extends for less than one
mile, and is chiefly confined to two parallel streets, Washington and
Tremont, through which the great tide of travel running north and
south, and representing a population of 850,000 souls, passes all day
long. The great shopping districts are about in the middle of this
mile. The West End Railway Co. finding that their cars take longer to
pass over this mile than over three or four miles in the suburban
districts, have asked the Rapid Transit Commission to recommend to the
Legislature to allow them to construct a short subway running under
the Common and a part of Tremont Street, and coming out at Adams
Square. The nature of the ground admits of such a subway being
connected with elevated lines at each end when desired. The subway
would be similar to the short subway in New York under Fourth Avenue,
between Thirty-fourth and Forty-Second Streets. It would be lighted at
short intervals by openings in the roof, and would be unobjectionable
in every respect. Near Park Street Church, where the great crowding
shown in the illustration to the article in the May number now takes
place, there would be a central underground station, where passengers
could take trains to and from all parts of the city and suburbs. This
seems to be a simple and reasonable way of relieving the difficulty,
for the cars on the new subway would make so much better time than
those on the surface of the streets, that the larger part of these
would be withdrawn from the streets and take this route. The plan is
one that can be quickly carried out, and at a comparatively small
cost. The Commission, it is understood, will recommend this, but they
go a great deal farther. They follow in the footsteps of Berlin,
Paris, and London, and propose a circular or ring railway connecting
all the steam railroad stations. Part of the line will be elevated,
and it will descend under the Common and Tremont Street as the West
End line proposes to do. This ring line will have no rail connection
with either the steam railroads, or the street railways. Passengers
are expected to change cars, ascend and ride around this circle.
The experience of the European cities, to which I have
referred in my former article, has shown that these ring railways, in
consequence of their not following the lines of the principal
thoroughfares where people want to go, and of trying to induce people
to take a circuitous route where they do not wish to go, have been
utter failures, and are now being supplemented by lines running across
the circumscribed area in all directions, but always on the lines of
main streets. It does not appear as if this Boston ring scheme would
attract capital, as it would cost ten times as much as the other less
pretentious plan, and people would not ride on it even free of charge,
for they would have to pay another fare as soon as they left it, and
no time would be saved. We have criticized this plan not in a hostile
spirit, but present it as an object-lesson of what should be
avoided. Of all difficult tasks, there is none more difficult than to
make an American take the longest way around, when he can "cut
across."
The congestion of traffic, which makes the wide streets
of Chicago almost impassable at certain times and places, comes from
reasons which an inspection of the map on page 749 will clearly
explain. The clear area shows the suburban districts; the lightly
hatched area the built up part of the city; while the still darker
lines show the business centre. It is separated from the north and
west divisions by the rivers with their obstructive
swing-bridges. This area is so small that land has become immensely
valuable, and has caused the erection of those very tall buildings
peculiar to Chicago.
 |
| Map of Chicago, showing Rapid Transit Lines. |
The system which we have described adapts itself as if
specially designed for Chicago. Run in on the surface as far as you
can make speed, then run up upon elevated lines, and then run down
under the streets of the small business area, crossing under the
rivers by tunnels, limiting the subways to the shortest possible
lengths. Then delays from bridges and from street traffic would cease,
and the large damages consequent upon running through the streets of
the business area would be avoided. The map of Chicago shows one
thing peculiar to that town. In no other city that we know of are
there so many steam railroads running so far into the heart of the
city. The numerous grade crossings of these roads are a source of
delay to them, and of danger to all. No matter what the cost may be,
at some future time they will all have to be separated from the street
level, and the only practicable way is to elevate the level of their
rails. Their right of way is so valuable that within much of the area
included by the encircling parks and boulevards, it would seem
profitable to elevate the railways on structures rather than on
embankments. This would give a second right of way under them, upon
which electric cars could be run for local traffic passengers,
interchanged with trains above, making fewer stops. The structures
could carry the trolley wires necessary for supplying power to the
surface electric cars. The surface lines would descend into subways
which would connect all the railway stations together, cross under the
rivers, and traverse the business centre in various directions. The
map will show that such a plan as this, taken in connection with the
present street lines and some new elevated lines, would satisfy the
rapid transit requirements of Chicago for all time, and a no less
comprehensive plan will do this.
A new system of carrying passengers, called "the Multiple
Speed Railway," has been invented in Chicago.
One enemy of railroads is friction, and another momentum;
or that stored up energy which makes trains unwilling either to stop
or start. If they could be kept always moving and without stops, the
motive power would be much less than now.
It has been supposed (except by horse-car conductors)
that it was necessary to stop a car to let passengers get on and off,
but this plan does away with all that.
Imagine a continuous line of platforms on wheels moved by
electric motors at the rate of three miles an hour, at which speed
persons can step on a moving platform from a station. Along side of
this is another line of platforms moving six miles an hour. We step
upon this. Beyond this are the cars, moving nine miles an hour, into
which we step and take our seats. There being a continuous line of
cars the whole length of the road, the carrying capacity of this
system is enormous, being at least three times as great as that of the
Brooklyn bridge cars.
It is stated that this system will be used to carry
passengers about the World's Fair grounds.
The city of New York, as everybody knows, is surrounded
by water and is long and narrow. This means a great concentration of
traffic on parallel avenues and streets running north and south. From
this peculiar shape, the walking distance was reached earlier than in
other cities, and this led in New York to the earliest invention of
horse-car lines. The same causes made New York the first city to build
elevated railways, and these causes are now urging New York to
undertake a still more costly system of rapid transit, either above or
below ground. The official Commission on Rapid Transit has decided in
favor of subway lines from the Battery to the Harlem River, and
surface or elevated lines above the Harlem River, a distance of about
ten miles. While street railways are unobjectionable, such a long one
would not be popular in our climate. The questions of ventilation and
motive power are not yet solved. Lines under ground have much less
capacity than those in daylight, where trains can be run twenty to
thirty seconds apart, which no sane man would dare to do in a
tunnel. Mr. Depew, with equal wisdom and wit, has summed up the whole
case. "Americans do not like to go under ground until they are dead."
The Commissioners themselves say, that while they
appreciate that a masonry viaduct would be the most desirable means of
transit, they fear that it would be too costly, and take too long to
acquire the right of way. The map on page 751 shows the location of
the subways proposed by the Commission; with the exception of Madison
Avenue, which is not suitable, the locations seem the best possible,
following as they do the lines of the crowded streets.
The vital defect of the New York Rapid Transit
Commissioners' scheme is that it tries to throw all the burden on
private capital, when it ought to be shared by the whole community, as
the whole community is benefited in many ways. To do this, the
following plan is suggested:
 |
| Section of Proposed New Street,
Viaduct, and Warehouses, New York. Drawn by
H.T. Schladermund. |
Let the city of New York open two new streets, one on the
east, one on the west of Broadway, extending as near the southern
point of the island as possible. The western street should run to the
Boulevard at Fifty-Ninth Street. The eastern street to the New York
Central line at Forty-Second Street. These streets should each be one
hundred and fifty feet wide, of which seventy feet should be set aside
for a stone and iron viaduct, sixty feet for a roadway on one side of
it, and twenty feet for a sidewalk, as shown in the drawing. This
viaduct could carry two express and two local trains, with platforms
between at the stations; and the spaces which extend from one station
to another should have extra tracks for turnouts, storage of cars,
etc. The viaduct should be of solid masonry through the blocks, while
the streets should be crossed by structures like those of Berlin. The
viaduct foundations should be carried below the level of the streets,
forming subways in which freight trains could ran. The viaduct would
thus form a series of fireproof storage warehouses, artificially
cooled if required. They would be all connected by rail with the New
York Central and other railways. The rental of such storehouses would
return four per cent. on the cost over and above taxation and repairs
of their construction. The city should lease this seventy feet, which
is needed for the viaduct, to a private company who would build it and
operate the road under proper conditions. The city would gain two new
wide avenues, running north and south, for wheel traffic, which would
relieve the congested condition of Broadway and other streets; and, as
all will admit, are much needed. It would also gain an ideally perfect
system of rapid transit.
 |
| Proposed Local and Express Train
Station, Broadway, New York. |
Let us see if the cost would be an insuperable
obstacle. Valuing 25 feet lots and buildings at $50,000 each, or $20
per square foot, there would be, exclusive of present streets, 594,000
square feet per mile, costing nearly twelve million dollars, the fixed
charges on which at three and one-half per cent., the rate at which
the city borrows money, would be $415,800 per mile, from which deduct
rental of 70 feet at same rate, leaves a balance of $221,760 per
mile. There would be about nine miles required, costing the city
annually about two million dollars. The warehouses would be taxable
property, and new buildings would be built on one side of the new
streets, whose rapid transit facilities would make them very
desirable. The increase of revenue from taxation would in a few years
meet the whole annual outlay. The private company would pay $1,746,360
yearly for its right of way. Its masonry viaduct would cost it
nothing, as the rentals would pay for that, leaving only street
crossings to be provided for. A subway line with its stations and land
damages cannot be built, with four tracks for less than three million
dollars per mile. The fixed charges on nine miles at five per cent.,
the current rate of interest, would amount to $1,350,000. To make up
the difference of $396,360 would require but 7,927,000 more passengers
yearly at five cents. Is it not probable that a line running in open
air and daylight, and having double the capacity of a subway, would do
as much as this? (The year's rent to be paid to the city, on viaduct
line could be reduced one-fourth by making it for four tracks only, or
57 feet wide, except at stations. This would make yearly rental
$1,809,770, or less than the fixed charges on a four-track subway.)
Above Fifty-ninth Street very much less expensive
elevated lines could be run in the centre of the Boulevard. Above
Forty-second Street, on the East Side, it has been suggested to run
over the centre of Park Avenue, which is one hundred and forty feet
wide. This would allow of making openings in the New York Central
tunnel below, which would improve it very much.
As any comprehensive scheme of rapid transit for New York
would require a long time to carry out, present relief can be best
obtained by giving greater facilities to the elevated lines. Instead
of being prevented from laying third tracks and acquiring better
terminals, they should be encouraged, so far as it can be done without
cost to the city. The completion of a third track on the Eighth and
Ninth Avenue lines, upon which express trains with few stops are run,
has reduced the time from the Harlem River to South Ferry from
fifty-two to twenty-five minutes. If the East Side lines could ran
similar express trains the public would be greatly benefited.
 |
| Map of New York--Existing and Proposed
Lines of Rapid Transit. |
New York was built up by commerce, borne in ships and
canal boats on the water, and she is connected with the railway system
of the country by only one line, a very great one, it is true.
Passengers and freight we know are transferred from the trunk lines
which end in New Jersey by ferry-boats and barges. No better way of
handling freight can be devised, as the barge with its load of eight
or ten cars can be towed to wharves at any part of New York or
Brooklyn, just as the canal-boats that come down the North River are
towed.
Ferry-boats were invented for the harbor of New York by
Colonel John Stevens, not long after Fulton's successful trips by
steam on the Hudson River, and are admirably adapted to their
purpose. The design has been imitated all over the world. There are
few better designed craft than one of the modern steel ferry-boats
with twin screws at each end, and double deck accommodations. The
great crowds of foot-passengers and teams that come and go to and from
the lower part of New York cannot be better served than by these
ferry-boats. But the through passengers who arrive at Jersey City and
Hoboken by train require a better mode of crossing the river. A bridge
upon which trains could run into the heart of New York would be a
great convenience and saving of time, especially when the ferry-boats
are detained by fogs or ice. The success of the Brooklyn Bridge has
been so great that it is proposed to build three or four new bridges
over the East River; two at the lower end of the town to connect the
elevated railway systems of New York and Brooklyn; and two above
Forty-second Street for steam railroads only.
The New York & New Jersey Bridge Company propose to cross
the North River at Seventy-first Street and connect with ten railroads
that now stop at the right bank of the river. This bridge will be
connected by a steel viaduct with a great union station at
Forty-second Street and Broadway. Another line will give connections
with the New England railroads. The grades will be easy, averaging
forty feet per mile. It is intended to have a large hotel at the
station, so that passengers can reach their rooms without leaving the
building.
Besides this bridge, there are numerous tunnels projected
under both rivers, and one is partly built. Of these tunnel projects,
it may be said that the difficulties of making approaches to them and
connections with railway lines are very great. Their capacity also is
very much less than that of a bridge, and they are not looked on with
favor by capitalists.
A few words more on the social and economical advantages
of rapid transit will close this article. Let us see what has been
done:
Mr. Henry M. Whitney, President of the West End Railway
Co., of Boston, in his admirable argument before the Committees on
Cities and Taxation of the Massachusetts Legislature, contrasts the
European systems of increasing the fares according to distance
traveled, with the American system of one fare for all distances. The
American street lines lose money on their long-distance passengers,
but more than make it up on their short-distance passengers. The
tramway fare in Berlin is 2.5 cents, or 10 pfennigs, for each 1.5
miles. When you go beyond the line you have to you have to pay two
fares, and so on, so that to ride six miles would cost 10 cents. By
the American system, which discriminates in favor of the suburbs, a
man can ride ten miles or more to his home for 5 cents. Also, as
Mr. Whitney well shows, the increase of speed due to the electric
system, shortens each trip ten to twenty minutes. "While you are
legislating under this roof," he says, "to reduce the hours of labor,
this transportation company, by simply changing its system, has
reduced the hours of labor nearly half an hour per day." The effect of
the other system, where the suburbs are discriminated against, may be
seen in the crowded state of the houses in Berlin. In 1885 there were
but 2,820 private houses, and 900,000 out of 1,122,000 persons lived
in tenements; 478,000 of whom lived in one room that could be heated,
302,000 in tenements of two rooms, and 101,000 in cellar or
underground tenements. Contrasting this with Somerville, a suburb of
Boston, containing about forty thousand persons, Mr. Whitney shows
that there are 7,000 houses, making the number of persons to a house
5.9, which is about the same number as is found in the rural districts
of our well-settled States. That is to say, people can live in a
comfortable town only five miles, or half an hour's time, from Boston,
paying ten cents a day to go there and return, and be no more crowded
in their dwellings than are people who live in the country.
Is it any wonder that our cities and their suburbs grow
at the expense of the rural districts? How fast they grow has been
shown by the United States Commissioner of Labor, C. D. Wright, in an
article in the Popular Science Monthly. I have translated his
columns of figures into a diagram [p. 752], which shows the increase
of population in New York, Philadelphia, and Boston, in the inner,
congested wards and in the suburban wards, during the thirty years in
which street railways have been in use.
Other observations show that the rate of increase in the
suburbs of London, over that of the older, congested parts of that
city, is equally great. "Outer London is beginning to vie in
population with the 'inner ring.' In a few decades hence it will have
passed it." The English writer goes on to say: "If the process goes on
unchecked, the Englishman of the future will be a suburb-dweller, and
the suburban type will be the most wide-spread and characteristic of
all, as the rural has been in the past, and the urban may be said to
be in the present."
The same thing may be said of this country by those who
see the great ex tent of suburban area that has been annexed to all
our cities since the introduction of the electric trolley
system. While it is true that, without the skill and ingenuity of
inventors and engineers the rapid transit of to-day would not be
possible, yet it is also true that, unless the relation between these
systems and the community is fixed upon a proper and just basis,
trouble will always come, and neither the public nor investors will be
satisfied.
Our present systems have grown up in a hap-hazard sort of
way. Certain astute persons have procured from State legislatures
charters for street or elevated lines, granting all the privileges
that could be thought of and imposing very few obligations. All that
the city, whose streets were taken, could do was to try and get as
much money as possible out of these companies by taxation. If it
succeeded, the company took it out of the public by diminished
service. As the Legislature commanded the situation, the companies
were obliged to retain lobbyists to protect their interests. The
effect of all this has been that the ownership and control of street
lines has fallen into the hands of persons eminent rather as
politicians than as capitalists.
The advent of the electric system has changed all
this. Street railway shares are now sought eagerly by investors, are
quoted in the money markets of the world, and have attracted the
attention of the most conservative bankers. The vast amount of capital
invested in these lines is shown by the following list, showing those
of the United States and Canada up to September, 1891:
| Miles operated by animals | 5,443 |
| Miles operated by electricity | 3,009 |
| Miles operated by steam motors | 1,918 |
| Miles operated by cables | 660 |
| Total | 11,030 |
| Number of all cars | 36,517 |
| Number of animals in use | 88,114 |
The number of animals has diminished during the last year
26,181, showing the rapid increase of the use of electric and cable
power. The total capital invested is not far from nine hundred and
twenty millions of dollars. This shows the great importance of a
proper regulation of those important properties.
There are but two ways in which public service can be
performed- either directly by the paid servants of the public, or
indirectly through chartered companies. In our country, public opinion
has decided in favor of the latter. Until our cities are managed on
business principles and run by experts, few would wish to see their
powers extend ed. The management of steam railways can be regulated by
competition, and all that government should do is to see that safety
is provided for, and that all are treated fairly and
alike. Competition cannot be applied to street railways except in the
beginning, for when all the avenues of access to the heart of a city
are occupied, no new lines can be built, and those who first get
possession have a monopoly of surface travel. Charters may be given to
elevated lines and to subways, but combination may take place and the
monopoly then becomes absolute. This is the justification for the
exercise by the community of regulation and even interference with the
management of street railways.
The community, however, should not only be just but
generous in its dealings with the companies, and share with them the
burden of rapid transit by furnishing the place to put the lines,
either on the surface, or above, or below ground. That is to say, the
city should condemn the damages caused by any of these forms of rapid
transit, pay the abutting property owners before they are built; and
charge the companies a rental for the same based upon the rate at
which the city can borrow money, as we have suggested in the case of
the proposed new viaduct streets for New York.
The companies, who are the other parties to the contract,
should be strictly held to perform the following duties:
- To run cars as often as the public service demands, and extend
their lines when the public service demands. In case of disagreement
the matter should be settled by arbitration.
- To charge uniform fares for all distances, and but one single
fare, all over the city or town limits. Even where there are many
companies, interchanges should be free.
- To run at agreed-on rates of speed, maintain clean and
well-lighted cars, properly heated in winter, and having all modern
improvements.
- To use that form of rail which interferes least with ordinary
traffic, and to keep the pavements clean and in order between the
outer lines of rails.
- To pay an annual rental for the right of way.
In return for the proper performance of these duties the
community should give the companies the place to put their tracks. In
case of strikes they should have the full protection of the military
and police, as if they were public servants. Conductors should be
special constables authorized to arrest drunken or disorderly
persons. In running cars they should have the right of way, and other
vehicles should not be allowed to detain the cars and their
passengers.
Finally, after paying their rental they should be exempt
from all taxation, except on real estate owned by them. In lieu of
taxation the payment to the community should be by lowering fares.
The accounts of the companies should be subject to the inspection of
public officers, and when the net earnings during a certain number of
years should be found to exceed ten per cent. on the capital invested,
a lowering of fares should take place. In case of dispute, the matter
should be settled by arbitration. It may be said that fares can only
be lowered a cent at a time, and that this is too much. But there is
nothing to prevent the sale of tickets in bunches of twenty-five, at
any fraction of a cent discount.
All these stipulations should be embodied in contracts
between the cities and the companies, which should be perpetual,
except in case of forfeiture by the company for neglect or
non-performance of duties. All the mutual stipulations the courts
should enforce. It seems to the writer that such an arrangement would
place the operating of rapid transit lines in the same position as if
it were done by the public directly, except that the payment to the
company would be a possibility of a ten per cent. dividend to be
earned by business ability, instead of payment by fixed salaries. It
is a great mistake to tax transportation in any shape, for all
experience has shown that the tax comes out of the public in the end,
from economies which result in inefficient service. The higher the tax
the company pays, the less it does for the public in other ways. Also,
high taxes upon corporations are direct incentives to public
extravagance. On the other hand, the lowering of fares is a positive
gain in every way. When the fares on the New York elevated lines were
reduced from five cents during four hours and ten cents during the
rest of the day, to an uniform fare of five cents all day, the
increase of travel more than repaid the Manhattan Company. The saving
to the community during five years has amounted to 1.36 cents on
890,824,786 fares, or a total of $12,107,600. If the city of New York
bad taken this sum in taxes, what would it be now? There is no reason
why, when new franchises are to be granted, that the city should give
away a safe ten per cent. investment. A rental should be fixed, based
upon the cost of condemnation of damages for right of way, and the
franchise should then be sold to those who would bid the highest sum
for it, after agreeing to pay the rental and be bound to perform the
duties we have described. The maximum allowable dividends are
purposely placed high, so as to induce the companies to adopt
improvements and attract custom, as private individuals do in their
business. If they were restricted to a small dividend, they would not
be induced to improve their service and change from horse to cable or
electric motors. Under some such mutual arrangement as we have
suggested, made definite and lasting, not only would street railway
investments be safer and more attractive, but the complaints of slow
and dirty cars and no seats would quickly disappear.
Finally, we re-state our original propositions:
The population of our cities is increasing in a greater
ratio than that of the country at large. This increase is caused by
the increase of industrial occupations which can best be done in a
city. The growth is mainly a suburban growth, and the places once
occupied by crowded tenements are being taken for purposes of business
and manufacture. The steam railways can supply food and access to a
city of any size. The growth of cities will never stop as long as
these conditions last. The only question is, how to get in and out
from the suburbs where people live, to the heart of the cities where
they work and trade. The solution is found in such methods of rapid
transit as we have attempted to describe, or in other better ones yet
to be invented. What shall be the relations between the community and
its servants, the chartered companies, is one of the most important
questions of the day.
Henry George, in his letter to His Holiness, Pope Leo
XIII., says: "There is a natural law by which, as society advances,
the one thing that increases in value is land- all growth of
population, all advance of the arts, all general improvements of
whatever kind add to a fund." So far we all agree with him. But this
is his conclusion: "Add to a fund that both the commands of justice
and the dictates of expediency prompt us to take for the common uses
of society."
No! Mr. George. So long as a poor man can buy an acre of
land within an hour's ride of that city where he finds constant work,
and can buy everything he wants at the best rates, and do all that for
ten cents a day-he will never allow Henry George to tax his little
home out of existence for the good of an imaginary creature of the
brain called Society. And this increase of health and comfort to the
people, this strengthening of the bonds of the commonwealth, this
barrier against anarchy, has all been brought about by the humble
invention of "paving the roads with iron bars." Thus doth God work
His changes upon this earth.
 |
| Proposed Subway Station, Boston. Drawn
by Otto H. Dacher, engraved by W. B. Witte. |
|