Norwich bulletin., 1915-04-21
REGULATION OF JITNEY BUS

ven, said he had no grievance against the Connecticut company or the jit neys, nor under favor to either, but he
 believed in public protection. He said the trolley company property was re- sponsible for any damage that might incur. and the jitney is not responsi- ble and ought to be bonded. No mat ter whether it be bond or insurance, as long as passengers are protected. These jitneys are common carriers, without the protection in the event of injury that applies to the trolley and railroad companies.
 State Should Protect People. The state of Connecticut should pro tect the people who ride in jitneys re- gardless of the representatives of the trolley and jitney people who are at
 this hearing for the money there is in it. He urged favorable report of | measure that would protect the pas sengers. In response to a query from MT. Back, MT. Riley said he repre- scented himself
 Kendall Pierce of Bristol, in beralf of the Bristol and Plainfield Tramway company, said while willing to meet the jitneys, they should be placed on like basis. Not right to allow compe- tition without regulation, for the jit- the service we'll and good. Put the | jitneys in the same plane as trolley cars and make them run regularly, with or without passengers. and night as well as day and in all kinds of l weather. He urged the committee to l report in favor of jitney running on schedule time and on specified routes, and furnish protection and safety to passengers and others. The bond or insurance plan should be made appli- | cable to the jitneys so that they. be made responsible for damage claims, and liable to suit. He was not op- posed to fair competition.
 Favored Restriction.
 Representative Hough, of Washing | ton. favored regulation and restriction l of the jitney, and believed that jitneys should be bonded sufficiently to com pensate for injuries sustained by pas sengers, or others. He believed in | the state regulation of jitneys. Every driver of a jitney should insure pas 1 sengers to the full capacity of the car John Cassidy of Waterbury.A | John Cassidy of Waterbury. said he l represented the Waterbury and Mill
 dale Tramway company. the Green
 Line, small corporation. He said
 trolley companies are not all cream l The jitneys are common carriers and | should be governed by the common l carrier law and be regulated by the | state. It Is not the purpose to put the 1 jitneys out of business, but they should | be regulated and regulated now, rather 1 than two years hence. The interest l are represented at the hearing by law yers, but if no law is passed, the peo- l pie will be represented in Hartford two years hence in opposition to a public
 service unregulated and not restricted | About Damage Redress.
 l William Rephael, of Hartford, re- l ferred to the accommodation of the l Connecticut company, and said the 1 trolley company was responsiblg-~for 1 damages and also responsible for the upbuilding of the suburbs. He told
 l of ride in jitney with eleven pas
 | sengers in a four passenger car. What l guarantee is there that in the event of | damage redress could be had he ask | ed. He doubted the general efficiency
 of the jitney system and it's stability. l Michael Kenealy.
 | Michael Kenealy said some men here
 | seem to think the denunciation of the
 | Connecticut company may be an agru-
 | nent in favor of jitneys. There is
 l not a place in the state where the Con-
 i necticut company operates, that the
 i people do not want it and who do not
 | want extension of service. He said
 | he was not an attorney of the Con-
 | necticut company but of the Shore
 Line company, but he had the right as
 | citizen of the state to speak in the
 l interest of the state. The jitneys are
 i without regulation, from the trans
 l portation of passengers for profit-a
 dangerous machine of transportation. | Autos Dangerous.
 l The automobile is inherently danger ous in its operation. Now the pur- l pose is to run these machines as a l common carrier and without regula- tion. The question is whether such a | business should be regulated in the public interest.
 Opposed to Parallel Lines. Edmund M. Day. of Hartford, repre- senting the Connecticut cotnpany which, he said, as owned by the New York, New Haven and Hartford Rail- road company, and a large sum of money is invested, and ought to be protected from unfair competition. This bill was submitted in a regular and legitimate way, and all that is asked is that the public policy of the state be continued which is opposed out restrictions. All common car riers should be on the same plane and contribute to the service rendered in the matters of cleaning the streets from snow and the like. including the jitneys. He urged for legislation in the interest of the public.
 New Haven Trades Council Against Jitney.
 Edward O'Meara, of New Haven. representing the New Haven Trades council favored regulation of the jit- ney service, saying that if permitted to compete with the trolley compaties | of the state, they should not be permit | ted to have privileges that are not en- 1 joyed by the established trolley com 1 panies.
 l After a three hours session, Senator Isbell declared the hearing closed. | ps~sEeR.