Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1917-06-12
City Scores Victory
for Transit Bills
Continued from Page One

Continued from Page One
have heard 50 much about the city is re-
quired to offer to the Philadelphia Rapid
Transit the right to operate these lines and
the Philadelphia Rapid Transit has ninety
days in which to accept or reject the city's
terms.
Here's where the little joker comes in.
II the company rejects the city's proposal
then tho city may offer the same terms to
an Independent operator You can readily
see that terms acceptable to an existing
company would not be possible of accept
ance by an Independent operator.
But, even if an Independent operator
could accept those terms, where would the
common people get Off as to nve-Cent fares
with universal free transfers?
THE truth again is they would he COM
PEELED to pay five cents on the high-speed
lines and five cents more on the surface
lines.
There only is left municipal operation.
Suppose the high-speed lines were operated
by the city, again / ask where would the
common people get off with nve-Cent fares
and universal trangfcrs-eCho answers
where?
Unless you gentlemen are willing that
the people of Philadelphia shall be In n po-
self, it means that the people and the city
will remain shackled, and the =. r. T. can
well say, Take what we offer or leave it.
This legislation asked cannot affect any
other city in this Commonwealth. | say to
you gentlemen that, |, as Mayor of Phila-
delphia recognize my duty to the transit
company and will protect its interests as
fully as propose to protect the interests of
the city.
"All ever have asked was an operating
contract fair alike to the city and company.
| do not believe the citizens of Philadelphia
can be well served by taking an unfair ad-
vantage of the 2. r. r. nor do | believe
they want TO obtain any unfair advantage,
but | insist there must be "A square deal all
around.
1T is my earnest belief that such a condi-
tion is entirely dependent upon your favor
able action upon these bills Therefore /
again urge you to put me in a position
where | can help tho people of the city out
of a hole they never should have gotten
into and help the company out of hole
equally as bad
sharp clash occurred between Senator
McNichol. on one side and the Mayor and
Chairman Gaffncy. Of Councils Finance
Committee, on the other, when Senator Nc
Nichol attempted to show that the entire
transit muddlc at il now stands is a result
of the hasty action Of the Public Service
Commission in granting the first certificate
of public convenience without having pre-
vlously asCcrtaiHed what was to follow
The Mayor and Mr.. Gaifney said that the
commissions action was ill-advised, but
both united in denying that the present sit
uaton was the result of that action.
The Mayor then said he regarded the en-
tire transit development program a mis-
take.
Il do not believe" he declared, that
the city should ever have embarked upon
this project. The company should have been
forced to extend its system. There is no
use denying that mistakes have been made
and we want this legislation to aid in recti-
flying these mistakes.
The question simply resolves itself into
one thing-arc we going TO serve the COM
pany or the people Of Philadelphia"
STRONG PLEA FOR SALUS BILL
William Draper Lewis, legal adviser Of
the Smith administration, made strong
plea for the passage of the Salus bill as
the most important Of the measures under
consideration
In the course of our conferences" said
Mr. Lewis, 1--WE learned that the company
was opposed 10 the Salus bill because it
removes the advantage the company now
has over the city"
Mr. LewiS in conclusion, offered several
minor amendments TO the Salus bill, cor
roofing typographical errors and provided
that the cost Of maintaining switch connec-
tions should be born jointly by the city and
the transit company,
An amendment to the Hecht eminent do
main bill was also introduced by Mr.. Lewis
clearing up several doubtful points and