Norwich bulletin., 1917-10-23
iNVESTlGATIES COMMITTEE
 HAS BEEN APPOINTED.
Is to Look Inn the Matter of Increased Trolley Fares on Shore Line System.

Arthur M Brown, Hon. T. c. Murphy and County Commissioner George H. Bradford of Montville have been ap- pointed by President Charles W. James of the Chamber of Commerce -fo Nor wich, Conn, Inc, as the committee to investigate the matter of the increase iii trolley fares inaugurated Oct. 5fh by the Shore Line Electric Railway company. This committee has been appointed in compliance with request made last week by the retail mer- chants bureau to the directors of the hamber of Commerce. The directors Of the Chamber of Commerce took the matter up and the president. was au- thorized to appoint the committee of three. ;
 Regarding the action of the local Chamber of Commerce, the New Lon- don Day said editorially on Monday:
 The Norwich Chamber of Commerce contemp1ates making a petition to the state public utilities commission that shall ask for general restraint upon the fare increase recently established by the Shore Line Electric Railway
 The, street railway company will scarcely complain at such an action. Wnat.ysr its oPinion may .,o1d on there be other criticism The public utilities commission was created with especial regard to the threshing out of quesAsn of rates and service. 1t is the proper
 
 But there is an aspect of the mat ter which should not be permitted to escape public understanding.
 Street railway charters guarantee to the incorporators, and thek' successors, II, return for the risk of their venture. for their burdens of taxation and pub- lie service, the privilege of fixing req sonable rates. that is to say. rates which are not only rational with re- spcct to the advantage of the com m also with respect to a profit for the corpor- ation on the business which 1t must do.
 Some of the older Connecticut char ters fixed the rate rigidiy by com manding expressly five ceAt fare, then reasonable enough for lines opera ted within city limits. though the five cent rate of fare will no longer yield a req sOnable profit on invested street rail- way capital. The newer charters were not so limited. The laws of the state do not provide definite rates for street railroads, nor has the Connecticut pub lie utilities commission set up. as yet, it's judgment of what percentage or return upon capital will, as the rliho be regarded as reasonable.
 The public utilities commission of New York state has fixed the ordinary rule of reasonable profit as per cent. on the investment. This does not seem too high.
 On the lines affected by the recent rate change, the annual return to the corporation, on the basis of existing costs. will not beusufficient. as a whole, to fully pay current interest charges. In other words, the ownership will not be making any profit whatever, not to mention reasonable profit" of what ever percentage, on investment On none of the divisions Of these lines that might on any rational ground be regarded As a separate'public-r -responsi- bility, or as an individual charter con- tract, can the ate of net profit reach more than 6 per cent. on the invested capita1. =
 In no case, therefore, in advance of the commissions finding. can 1t seem likely that the increased rate scheme may be in justice substantially re- strained unless it can be shown:
 First, that the increased rates will not increase revenues.
 Second. that deficit from the cost of public service at the old rates ought to be borne by the street railway ownership and not by the
 Bear in mind that such a burden could not be borne by the railways without credit. and that credit is inn possible without profits.
 If either contention should hold, then the only sane recourse left for the owners would be first of all receivGSA ship, with it's hard penalties both upon ownership 2nd service, and after ward plea for public ownership.
 with US resources of taxation, is the only ownership that can do business without obtaining costs from the receipts of operation. Could public ownership maintain 4econ- omies, and afford sufficient service inn rrovement to offset private Ownership's necessary imposition of somewhat higher fares?
 That is the question which. however. a petition to the public utilities com- mission in this street railwa fare mat ter might terminate, must be inevita- bly brought up for verdict by public resistance of higher fares for the meeting of higher costs. The nations capitalists have absolutely refused, and justifably so. to stand by street railway companies on any ether inter pretation of the word "reasonable' in street railway charters. They can see no reasonableness in investing their money to certain loss, or in voluntari- ly assuming a public burden with less than the least appreciation or reward.