Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1913-09-11
PUBLIC UTILITY commission DENIES NEWARK'S
APPLICATION FOR LOWER RATE OJERSEY CITY
Continued from First Pageo

| DER the general railroad act IL OF -
not, under the constitutional reserved
power, to after, repeal or amend cor
porate charters. modified or displaced
by the public utilities act Up. L. 1911
! chapter 1861. which empowers this
board after hearing. upon notice, by
order in writing. to fix just and rea-
| sonable fares and charges where
| the existing rates are found unjust,
unreasonable or discriminatory.
Anent Newark Merchants.
"a memorandum signed by Mr..
Moses Plaut, chairman of the COM
mittee on internal trade, a commit
| tee of the Newark Board of Trade,
was presented to this board. 1t was
accepted as brief, but does not con-
stitute O part of the testimony in
| the case. The. memorandum war
rants a brief addendum to the report
| in this case.
Zone of the contentious of said
memorandum is that the rates be-
! tween Newark and Jersey City di-
reefs trade of large value from
the merchants of Newark. The pop
ulation of Jersey City in and around
| Summit avenue to an alleged num-
! Der of 10000 is described as a popu-
lation tributary to Newark. This
| trade is alleged to be diverted by
| eXtant fares to New York; and the
| further contention is made that the
rate tariff fabric has been construct
ed to favor New York city to the
| injury of Newark and other points.
without an inquiry into the actual
effect of rates upon trade, which was
no part of the present inquiry, it
would not be appropriate for the
board to pass upon the allegations
above cited. But prima facie it would
appear that if the Newark-Summit
avenue one-way rate were reduced
from fifteen cents to twelve cents, the
latter being the only definite figure
suggested by compliments counsel,
the reduction, while it made the trip
to Newark three cents less, would
similarly make the rate from Newark
to New York three cents less 1t may
well be that this increased incentive
to trade in New York would counter
act the equal increase in incentive for
Jersey City people to trade in New
ark. Furthermore, 1t would seem true
that increased facility of reaching
New York, while it may augment the
number who go there from New Jer-
, sey either to trade or to work, acts,
on the other hand, to induce numbers
who otherwise would live in New
York to establish homes and live in
New Jersey.
Advantage in Service.
There is another aspect of this
matter which fairly deserves notice.
The service from Park place to Jersey
City and via the Hudson and Manhat-
tan to New York uptown and down
town is an undoubted advantage to
the cities at either terminus The
number of trains, the time of the trip
and the character of the service are
sufficiently in evidence to substantiate
this When the Pennsylvania pro-
posed to accept tickets to and from
the Hudson and Manhattan over the
latter lines uptown New York sta
tions other carriers demonstrated. The
respondent in this case doubtless
actuated by self-interested, but
not, therefore, necessarily improper
motives, persisted and afforded the
city of Newark the full use of an up
to-date system of transportation in
advance of anything then existing be-
tween Newark, Jersey City and New
York. The Pennsylvania contended Ii
was entitled to remuneration for their
enterprise and investment, and put
the through facilities of the McAdoo
tunnels at the disposal of the citizens
of Newark. When upon this line,
which has not been long in operation,
the fares are based upon the same
system as elsewhere on the Pennsyl-
vania system, the question arises
whether in the public interest of the
city of Newark some equitable con.
sideration Is not due the respondent
and whether some further experience
is not necessary before attempting to
force down the fares upon this par
ticular electric line.
For the reasons cited supra in the
report. the petition of the Board of
Street and Water Commissioners of
Newark will be dismissed. An order
will be so entered"