Columbia University Libraries Digital Collections: The Real Estate Record

Please note: this text may be incomplete. For more information about this OCR, view About OCR text.

April 5, 1890 Record and Guide. 473 Iron and Steel Association reported prices "so low asto wan-ant the impression that tiiey can be no lower." Pig iron, which sold for $53 per ton in 1872, sold for $16,50 in 1878. In 1878 the depres¬ sion of business and the decline in prices was made the subject of an investigation by Congress. In 1876 the cost of mining 100 bushels of coal was $2.50, whereas in 1883 it was $4, aud the iirice of the same quantity of coal on the dates given was $5.50 and i)l7.50. The years 1873 to 1879 were years of low prices and low wages iu tbe United States, and, years of relatively large exports of manu¬ factures to Gieat Britain, Austria, France, the Netherlands, Russia and other countries. In 1878 and 1879, but more especially in 1878, there was a marked increase iii our foreign trade in agi-icultural implements, bricks, manufactures of cotton, glass, India mbber goods, machinery, railroad iron, locomotives, stoves, leather goods, manufactures of wood, etc. In none of these waa the increase remarkable, but it was marked. In 1879—the beginning of better times, higher prices and wages—our exports of manufacturing goods declined, though the total value of our foreign trade was greater than in 1878, due to abundant harvests and the large amount of agricultural produce that in consequence was sent abroad. With the return of higher prices and a more prosperous domestic market we lost the ground we had gained abroad, and since then our export trade in manufacturing goods has grown slowly and increased but little. Strange as it may seem, a continuance of hard times at home ten years ago would have greatly improved our positiou in the markets of the world. To all appearances, another opporfcujiity such as that which arose in 1878 presents itself to-day. The increase in the price of goods abroad is equivalent to an increase in our import duties, so that our manufacturers are surer of the home market than they have been for years ; indeed, the advance in prices in Europe in the last twelve months is probably equivalent to a 10 per ,ient. higher tariff ; and this has been accomplished without the aid of politicians. Wages in Europe will not be so easily reduced as formerly, owing to the completer organization of labor that exists to-day and the fact that the "unions" have more support aud sympathy from the public and legislators than ever, so that a continuance of these conditions for a longer period than in 1878 is certain. The probability, how¬ ever, is that om- own labor organizations will ere long be following in the footsteps of " labor" abroad and will demand liigher wages, so that any advantages that the American manufacturer now pos¬ sesses over his competitors will be lost or neutralized. But our manufacturers should afc once recognize the opportunity that is theirs aud make the most of it. Will they do it? fight it out. If the Manhattan Company adopts a wasteful course of procrastination, why it will have to bear the consequent losses. Meanwhile the public suffers becauae of the squabble, which binds the couipany'a hands, and prevents it from taking more vigorous measures to extend its system. In the end, the property-owners will have been put to a good deal of unnecessary trouble, and the Manhattau Company to a good deal of unnecessary expense ; but, as is generally the case in legal contests, fche public will be the greatest losers and fche lawyers the greatest gainers. It is quite obvious that the Investigating Committee have pretty well sifted out all the iniquity there is to find in the ^Sheriff's office, and a very creditable showing it makes—for the Investigating Committee, Mr. Ivins has announced that he will next turn his attention to the Police Department, where he also expects to reap a rich harvest. It is very much to be doubted, however, whether anything of interest to citizens who like to read of the misdoings of their rulers wil) be elicited by the Fassett Committee, simply because the Republican organization of this city lias in part con¬ trolled the Police Commission, and it is no part of the duty of Mr. Fassett'a Committee fco show any wrongdoing in offices where the Republicans have a footing, In fact, we are very much afraid that the present investigation has been productive of just about as much valuable information on the inner workings of our City Depart¬ ments as we can expect, simply because Mi-, Platt has, or thinks lie has already accomplished his purpose, Tammany has certainly received a staggering blow, and that presumably was all that Mr, Piatt has been aiming at. The equilibrium of the city organizations has been restored ; the Republican nominee for Mayor nest fall may very well slip into the office, and iu that case it is perhaps just as well that the nooks and crannies of most of the depnrtments should remain unexplored. It may seem unjustifiable to assume tbat there is anything fco conceal in the other departments, but we are sorry to say that the dishonesty aud incompetency which is being continually brought to light in every direction places the burden of proof on the man, not who wished to show fchafc au office is badly adminisfcered, but on him who desires fco prove the reverse. The real contest, after ali, is not the Tammany machine vs. fche Re¬ publican machine, bufc the politicians vs. the taxpayers. And wo very much fear tbafc the contest is onesided to an extreme. The following is a letter from a prominent legal firm of this city, and opens a question which is of interest to our readers ; Editor Recokd akd Gdide : I iuelose a suggestive extract from a daily paper. Many or our clients are property-owners who have been grievously damaged by the "L" structures. Vice-President Hoyfc of the original " L " road tells us that in 1873 the " L " directors knew that they ought to pay the abutters. They made an issue of bonds at the rate of ^00,000 per mile for that purpose. Later, Mr, Hoyt says, they concluded to change tbeir construction contract so that these bonds were absorbed, and did not reach the property-owners. I cau tell you of casea where one-third of what the .Manhattan Company pays goes ia legal expenses to its lawyers and detectives and experts and printers, etc., etc., and whei-e flnally it haa had to pay the prop erty-ownera double what they would have accepted if they could be relieved of litiga¬ tion aud detectives aad the other annoyances to whicii the "L"road thinks it policy to subject every property-owner. Does not The Record think that au boaeat policy of settlement would pay the company, and be but justice to the property-owners ? L4WYEK. The extract to wliich our correspondent refers is the report of the decisions in nine cases handed down by the General Term^iu regard to the rights of properfcy-owners on Soufch 5th avenue and Greenwich street, in cases where they had acquiesced without objection to the construction of the road—the Judges holding that the property-owners could nofc be expected to know that they had a legal remedy for the damage until after the Court of Appeals had so decided. In reply to the question with which the "Lawyer" winds up his letter, we return an unqualified affirmative. Our only interest in the matter is that strict justice should be doue to all parties interested, including the general public. When¬ ever any property is injured by the elevated structures, the Man¬ hattan Company siiould pay for the injury ; it can afford to do so, and, aa we understand, ifc would not object to doing so, provided the damages are fairly assessed, and due allowance is made for any concurrent increase of value which has resulted from fche construc¬ tion of the road. Undoubtedly, also, much money has beeu unnecessarily spent by the prolonged litigation in wliich the com¬ pany has beeu involved ; and much confusion lias resulted from the conflicting decisions rendered by the Courts, It would be well if the whole business could be taken out of the region of legal technicalities, and jui-isdiction given to a competent Commission; but efforts in that du-ecfciou have beeu as unsuccessful as in the other. There is no alternative but to let the parfcies interested Although in its result fche annual contest between Governor Hill and the Legislature on the question of ballot reform is just as fruitful, as it has been hitherto, that is utterly sterile. Yet we judge that this year our Governor has escaped from the fray wifch less wear and tear than usual. To many simple-minded people who are not versed in the devious ways of politicians to whom electioneering devices are of no importance whatever, and who can see nothing but waste of time and material in casting iron on tbe water in the apparent expectation_that it willjfloat, the question wiil doubtless arise how far our Republicanpoliticians are sincere in their professions and actions in favor of ballot reform. It is one thing to pass a bill wliich they know will be vetoed, it is another to pass one which is sure fco become a law, and we shall have no fcest of then- sincerity in tbe matter until this legislative tinkering produces a pot. Be that as it may, tbe Governor has stood his ground this year better than ever before. There was a superficial fairness in his offer lo submit the question of the bill's coDstitution- aJity to the Court of Appeals; but he knew very well that the com¬ promise could not be accepted by the Republicans, because it would be au admission that fchere was some doubt in their minds as fco fche valitidifcy of such an objection. As an honest man he had no alternative but to veto the bill in case he considered it unconstitu¬ tional, with or wifchout a favorable brief from the Justices of the courfc, and iu spite of any popular opposition to hia course. This proposal was simply an electioneering trick; it gave the^Dcmocratic orators a more or less plausible excuse to " talk back," and call the Republicans insincere. Now that it is all over, ballot reform is as far off as ever. The spectacle with a few circumstantial variations will doubtless be repeated next session. Why nofc? A gentleman well kuv^wn iu,New York financial cii-cles, who went to England recently on an errand that brought him into close contact with many English financiers, expressed upon his returu his surprise at the number of men^in that country who con¬ ducted large businesses from tUugy offices and who afc any mo¬ ment could draw their check for a hundred thousand pounds. And, indeed, it would be difficult to realize the number of mod¬ erately wealfchy Englishmen were it nofc for the enormous extenfc of fcheir loaning operations to other countries. One reason ia, doubtless, tliat a very wealfchy man in that country, uuless, like Col. North, he forces himself on tbe public, or, like the Duke of Westminster, unites a title with his,money, is uot brought before the public by the newspapers in the way the wealthy men are on this side. Furthermore, it is quite possible fchat wealthy men there are satisfied with less. We seldom hear of a rich Americam retiring after he has accumulated a few million dollars.