The Washington times., 1913-10-22
ONE NICKEL, OR FOUR?

companies to exchange transfers, would not nee
60 outside the argument which street railway polio
in this town sustans
Mr.. ]. w. Nigh told the commission OF his eXper
in making trip of mile and half by car, II
which he must pay four fares while on the other han
he could ride thirteen miles across the District fo
one fare of 10 cents Mr.. highs crude and un
tutored processes could not understand why it shou
be necessary to have four nickels for mile and
half of ride, while one nickel sweated bit, wa
ample compensation for thirteen miles
There are about $40 900 other people in the towr
whose processes are just as hesitant and gummy, a
this point, Mr.. Nighs
Humilating as the confession is, The Times mus
admit that it finds itself, even in the light of Mr.
Darlingtons able and impressive address on const
tutional rights and due process of law, unable to
understand why mile and half is more than four
times as much as thirteen miles. Out of the penum-
bra of an impression gained from Mr.. Darlington
observations, however, we gather that properly
trained intellect readily understands that the Const.
tuition made it so.
The question seems to be whether it pays better
to charge four nickels or one nickel. What is the
testimony On this point of the street railway
agements of this city?
A few years ago a number of separate corpora
tions operated different parts of what now the
Washington railway system. Each corporation had
the privilege of charging nickel for ride over its
line.
At that same time, number of other separate
I'D ,da
of what are now the Capital Traction system. Zach,
again, had the privilege of charging nickel for a
ride over its line.
What happened? The Capital Traction company
in the exercise of its best business and financial
Judgment actually bought up, at very high prices a
number of these separate and independent lines, with
their separate and independent privileges of charging
nickel apiece, consolidated them into single sys
tem and imposed upon itself the obligation to accept
a single nickel where before two three four
had been atainable!
Was that bad business? Certainly two or three
or four nickels are more desirable than one nickel
Were these gentlemen guilty of financial hara-kir
in giving up the three-nicke good thing and accept
ing one-nickel substitute?
About that same time, likewise, astute
gentlemen who have never been accused of financial
improvidence, bought up, in the name of the Wash
ington Railway and Electric Company, another group
Of these separate and independent lines, each with
its separate and independent franchise to take
nickel for ride on its own line, and consolidated
them. Thus, as in the former case they
accepted a one-nckel basis of compensation, when
the same properties, if left alone, might have gone
shead on the twonickel, three-nicke or four-nckel
basis.
Was that also bad business? Is it possible that
two separate groups of capitalists and promoters
afflicted, at the time, with the same alteration
mat one nickel is more desirable than two?
Apparently these two groups of gentlemen have
never become convinced that they made an egregous
mistake. Their own proceeding testified that they
actually thought they making the properties
worth MORE MONEY by consolidating them together
and substituting the one-ncke basis for the two or
three nickel basis.
For, having brought their respective groups of
properties together in ttis way, they issued cap
itaization against them that by its imposing volume
could not but impress the idea that these gentlemen
thoroughly optimistic about the financial outlook
o. the one-nickel plan.
How do these gentlemen explain this strange
attitude?
Mr.. Darlington said that the Washington Railway
Company exchanges transfers with the City and Sub
urban Company, without any charge either way,
WITHOUT EVEN ANACCOUNTINGAS AS BETWEEN
THE TWO CORPORATIONS, because that pro-
cedure increased the business of both; made each
feeder to the other; encouraged business and gave