Daily Kennebec journal., 1913-07-10

L
| for constructive work. There is nue.
| truth in the claim Of these carrier
| that they have been SO occupied witt
| Investigations and so criticized by tho
| public that no fair opportunity ha!
| been given for the operation of tbeil
railroad properties. No railroad man
agement can succeed without the sup
/ port of the public which it serves
| 1t must not be forgotten that the rail
road is a public servant in fact a.
well as in name, and that the servic'
which it renders depends largely up
/ on the treatment which it receive
| from its master.
| But upon what terms is peace t.
| be secured? In the past the New
/ Haven Co, which has now become the
| dominant factor and which is mainl,
to be considered. has proceeded III
| open violation of some laws and ir
disregard of the spirit if not the let
ter, of others. This course upon tn.
part of the company is primarily re-
sponsble for this unfortunate agita-
| ion. That agitation cannot stop, and
ought not to stop. until its cause is
removed. Any betterment of railroad A
conditions in New England must be-
| gin with the assurance that the New
| Haven management will act not only
prudently but, above all. within the
letter and the spirit of the law
Innocent Must Suffer
The commission, the report points
out, is keenly alive to the fact that
| the stocks Of both the New Haven
| and the Boston & Maine are owned
largely in New England by estates and
persons who depend upon them as in
| vestments.
1T is unfortunate" continues the
report, that the widows and orphans
must suffer, but they. in theory. are
Responsible for the management which
their action. or possibly their failure
to act, has sanctioned. If the stock
holders of these properties, instead of
vilifying the critics of the New Haven.
had given some attention to the
charges made, their property would
today, be of greater value and tn"
problem an easier one"
The Panama Canal Act. of 1911. re
qures the railroads To relinanish
ownership or control of steamship
lines competing with their rail lines.
| The report suggests that this law dis
poses of the matter of the New Hav-
ems water lines. 1t continues:
Get Rid of Trolley Lines.
In our opinion the New Haven
should divest itself of its trolley lines.
The acquisition of trolley lines as
well as steam lines which are COM
petitive is already prohibited, but this
does not reach the root of the mat
ter"
1t is suggested that control by the
New Haven of existing trolley lines
probably would be used to prevent
the construction of other and eompet-
ing lines in the future. although the
acquisition of existing lines might not
be violation of the Sherman Act.
We feel that the public" says the
commission. may we'll protect itself
against the control of trolley lines
and the prevention of competition in
that field. Such competition is not
destructive of railroad business prop
err In that connection. the report
adds:
IT is worthy of remark that the
general counsel of the New Haven
company testified that, while the Leg
islature of Connecticut did finally vote
unanimously in favor of the New
Haven ownership of trolley lines. sen-
timent was at the outset the other
way. and it was only after 100000
had been expended in .molding' the
opinion of the Legislature that the
final result was attained
| The sa-calIed merger between the
New Haven and the Boston & Maine
is discussed at length but no opinion
is given. The report observes that
Boston has more at stake than all the
rest of New England. both as port
: and as a market and that whether
Boston would be injured by perpetua.
ton of the merger would depend
t largely upon whether the corporation
controlling the railroads of New Eng
: land was dominated by Boston or
| New York. It adds:
An Exclusive Monopoly.
IF the New Haven Company is
permitted to remain in control of the
Boston e. Maine system there will ex-
ist an almost exclusive monopoly of
the transportation facilities by rail-
road in the greater part of New Eng
land. 1t would seem to be perfectly
apparent that if this monopoly is suf-
fered to exist there must be some
where a power of regulation which is
co-extensive with the monopoly. In
other words, the Federal government
must assume jurisdiction over the
maintenance and operation of these
railroads in so far as may be neces-
sary to secure to the public proper
service. This Investigation emphaaizes
the fact that service is often of even
greater Importance than the rate
itself"
AS criticism of both freight and
passenger service developed, both
were considered. To both the New
Haven and the Boston a. Maine the
report gives credit for promptitude and
general excellence in their passenger
service, although 1t is distinctly noted
that safety of operation has not been
| considered"
Summing UP the passenger service.
| commissioner Prouty says:
| Upon the whole the record shows
| that the performance of the passen-
| ger trains of the New Haven iS enod