Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1915-04-09

nearing pdftlcuiarly with regard 70 charges
for the use Of the Union station. the opin-
ion says they indicate that the revenue
from local and Communication traffic on the
Washington branch does not cover opera
ing costs: that upon the Metropolitan
branch the revenue from this traffic not
only covers operating costs. but also fur
nishes substantial amount toward taxes.
capital charges and possibly profit; that
treating the two branches as a whole the
total earnings just about cover operating
costs"
ANY error made in the exhibits in as
certaining the direct expenses would cor
respondingly affect the results shown"
continues the report.
During the entire year ending June,
1914. on both the Metropolitan and Wash
ineton branches the respondent sold only
1000 sixty-trip tickets and 1921 180-trip
tickets, so that the density of the commu-
tation traffic in question is not great. This
fact cuts two ways and suggests two con-
clusions-either that. if the Communication
traffic be dealt with as a unit separate
from the other passenger traffic, the ex-
pense per passenger is high. and therefore
high rate is necessary; or that, If this
be regarded as incidental. not to be treated
as an entity apart from the other pas
seneer service except that actual loss is
not to be incurred thereby, it is not to be
strictly governed by comparisons of ex-
pense attributed to normal passenger
traffic and may properly be carried at
relatively low rate.
"In fixing reasonable fares for the par
ticular Communication traffic elements other
than cost which determine reasonableness
must not be CLOSED over. Value Of the
service to the habitual traveller. If often
vaguely conceived. is none the less real
factor. and fares tending to put the use of
the railroads beyond the reach Of the
average commuter of particular region
or which might tend to compel on large
scale changes Of residence, or which tend
to disrupt the community life Of those de-
pendent upon this service. must be viewed
in the light Of the carriers obligation as a
common carrier designed for community
service The respondent has rather elected
to treat these considerations of minor i'm
portance in determining reasonableness.
and pins its plea for the advanced fares
upon cost figures and the fact that many
1 m Mt thcfa iaI
agreement in making the communication
fares accord with general standard.
particular districts are to be dealt with
by carriers when they come to set new
fares in the light of the peculiar modifying
condition, and rule of thumb method of
fare fixing must be used with circumspec-
ton. The respondent has made rather
too much Of this arbitrary standard. which
1t asserts is now common among carriers
in determining fares of the nature Of those
now under consideration.
in the early days Of the Communication
traffic under consideration inducements
were offered by the respondent for settle
ment upon its lines. building materials
were carried at reduced prices, fares Of
the workmen employed upon houses were
put at low figure, passes were issued tC
influential members Of village commune
ties in expectation that they would induce
others to settle along the line of the re-
spondent; other special privileges. such a;
the free carriage Of marketing, were &C
corded. The present Communication farel
have been maintained for a long period.
These circumstances, of course, are no
determinative Of what is now a reasonable
fare passes have in general long sinc'
become Illegal. as have also undue prefer
ences. and the principle of estoppel we d.
not understand to be part Of the law as t
reasonable fares. 1t was held by the Su
preme Court that the interstate commerce
commission connot substitute for just an,
reasonable rate lower rate on the eroun,
that the railroad was by its former con
duct estopped from charging REASONABLE
rate"
Comparison of the Baltimore and Obi
, Communication fares in and out of Washing
, ing with fares in and out of New Yorl
according to the opinion, shows that in bu
, one instance 1.-The existing fares of tn
: Baltimore and Ohio under the present sixty
, trip ticket are higher than those of tn
! Central Railroad of New Jersey. markell
, so. for the greater distances that the
: compare favorably with the commutatio
; fares of the Pennsylvania into New Yor
!, (ferry stations or Hudson terminaD ths
when measured by the Communication fare
, of the Southern railway into Washingto
: they appear for comparable distances high,
! in each instance. This last is perhaps tn
most to our purpose of valid comparison
for ii is made with carrier operating
4 the same general locality and whose COZ
dtions Of operations, we may assume. al
proach those of the respondent.
4 THE financial result of the action of Il
J. Baltimore and Ohio in seeking to advant
: fares was admitted by Its chief witness
y be problematical. There was an estimal
OF the expected increase In earnings fro
g Communication traffic, but this was predicate
n upon continuance Of the present volun
i Of the Communication traffic under the pr
d posed fares. The protestants asserted thI
: many who are now commuters would n
Ir be able to continue to use the railros
a were the new fares to 60 into effect tn,
AZ Il =. a.
! inevitably get much Of the commutir
n business; that there would to certainl
IS be removals Of commuters to points near
II their places of occupation. 1t is not in
v probable. considering the large propose
n advance in the price Of the daily journt
to those who now use the 180-trip ticket
y that the railroad would lose considerab
NJ number Of Its present committing patron
Tai. los, ~ k.a Sc xso,,ld If oo.,raa roI,,s