English VI.

Debate of May 9, 1895.

Question: "Resolved, That the plans of the Subway Commission should be carried out."

Brief for the Affirmative.


Best general references: Boston papers, Feb. 20, '95; Mayor Matthews's Argument before legislature; Statement of transit commission April 9, '95; Boston Herald, July 18, 21, 25, 1894; Jan. 4; Mar. 4, Mar. 29, Apr. 10, 12, 22, 30, '95.

I. Rapid transit in Boston must have - (a) Capacity for large increase of traffic. - (b) Speed. - (c) Safety. - (d) Sound financial basis.


II. Various other schemes are inadequate. - (a) Surface roads. - (1) Do not eliminate danger. - (2) Do not relieve congestion. - (3) Entail great expense. - i. e. Street widening. - (b) Elevated roads undesirable in region of subway. - (1) Injure and destroy property. - (2) Do not abolish grade crossings of tracks. - (3) Not adapted to narrow, winding streets.

III. The Subway meets the demands. (a) The people desire it. - (1) Passed both branches of legislature by good majorities. - (2) Accepted by a normal popular vote: Boston Herald, Apr. 12, '95. - (3) Common Council voted against repeal. - (4) House defeated repeal bill: Boston Herald, Apr. 30, '95. - (5) Prominent business men endorse it: Morning Journal, Apr. 29. - (6) Opponents not representative men. - (b) Benefits local traffic. - (c) Benefits suburban traffic.

IV. The Subway is practicable in construction. - (a) Surface and sub-surface surveys have shown no engineering difficulty. - (1) Pipes of sewers disposed of. - (2) Foundations of buildings avoided. - (3) Injury to Common exaggerated. - (4) Sentiment should not obstruct necessary improvements. - (b) Steel construction cheaper and safer than old masonry tunnels. - (c) Details amply provided for. - (1) Ventilation. - (2) Lighting. - (3) Drainage. - (d) Outside estimate of cost $5,000,000. - (1) Sect. 1, already contracted for below estimate.

V. The Subway will be profitable in operation. - (a) More economical. - (1) No wear and tear on tracks from, - (x) Crossing of teams. - (y) Constant stops. - (2) Require no clearing in winter. - (3) (3) Quicker trips. - (4) No accidents from crossing tracks. - (b) More commodious. - (1) Four tracks in busiest part. - (c) Will command a rental sufficient to pay interest on debt incurred, and pay debt at maturity.

Brief for the Negative.

E. B. CONANT and V. H. MAY.

Best general references: The Subway Act, Boston Herald, April 2, 1895; Letter of J. J. McCarthy, Boston Herald, April 1, 1895; Letter of George Fred Williams, Boston Herald, April 5, 1895; Letters in Boston Transcript, March 23, and March 25, 1895.

I. A subway is not the most feasible plan for furthering rapid transit. - (a) Adopted only in London. - (b) Elevated road will best meet the difficulty. - (1) Can be constructed more cheaply. - (2) Common objections to elevated railroads not inherent.

II. The plan under consideration is undesirable. - (a) Enormous expense remedying only a part of the evil. - (b) Destroys a considerable part of Boston Common. - (1) Malls used for stations and ventilation. - (2) Trees destroyed.

III. Elevated roads are inevitable for the chief lines of the city. - (a) Subways not adapted to long distances. - (1) Great expense in construction. - (2) Unhealthfulness. - (b) Elevated road on Boylston and Tremont streets would cooperate with the suburban lines.

IV. The plan not authorized. - (a) Has never been submitted to the people. - (1) Question presented for vote last summer obscure. - (2) Many voters absent from the city. - (3) Expense underestimated. - (4) Vote taken on insufficient notice. - (b) Vote taken understood to be on question of elevated railroad.

V. The expense of the subway will raise the rate of taxation in Boston. - (a) Final expense of subway not to be judged by present estimates. - (b) West End Railroad can not afford to pay rent sufficient to cover the interest. - (c) Balance must be paid by Boston taxpayers.