New Britain herald., 1918-03-25

state. AS to whether these separate companies should have been merged and consolidated into the respondent as unified system, or whether the respondent can render as efficient public service as the separate com- pan1eS might furnish if not consoli- dated, is not for this Commission to determine at this time, as the consol- idation was in conformity with ap- parent public policy, having received the sanction of the Legislature of tho State.
 As a result of the consolidation, however, all the several separate properties (with one exception, the Torrington and Winchester Street Railway Company, have been physi- cally connected by the completion of extensions, connecting lines, and other constructions, making possible the continuous transportation of pas sengers, freight and express matter over its entire lines
 Should the Company Be Treated As
 Unit?
 Should the particular lines men, toned in the petition, namely the lines in the City of Hartford and those extending from the City into adjoining towns, be treated separate ly and independently of the respond ent's other lines and property, in de- tcrmining the reasonableness of the rates complained of, or should all the lines operated by the respondent as a unitary system, be taken into consid- eratlon? This is one of the most i'm portant and most controverted ques- tions involved in this case.
 This petition is brought under Sec ton 23 of Chapter 12S of the Public Acts of 1911, which provides that any city within which or between which and any other city, town or borough, a utility company is furnishing ser vice, may bring its written petition, alleging that the rates or charges made by such company are unreason- able. The rates or charges referred to do not necessarily include all the rates or charges for a particular ser vice or rates charged in 8 certain To- cality or between given points.
 The petitioner in this case com- plains of the rates for passenger traf- f1c in a certain locality, namely, the City of Hartford and on the lines eX- tending therefrom into adjoining  therefore, IS as to the reasonableness of the particular rates complained of. While the rate itself may be con- fined to a particular locality, the facts governing the reasonableness of such rate may involve a greater latitude.
 The respondent operates 503.76 miles of street railway in Connecti- cut, maintaining the same unit of fare on the zone system over all it's lines. Theoretically, therefore, the rates charged are the same in all sec- tions of the state where the company operates, and a change of rates 1n one city would necessitate change of rates over it's entire system or tn~ establishm of unit of fare in such city differing from the unit of fare maintaining in other parts of the system.
 The petitioner claims that "in de- termining whether or not the six-cent fare Is reasonable for the City of Hartford, the City has the right to have the lines within it's limits con- separately from the other lines of the company" and that eff the fve-cent fare is a reasonable fare in the City, the car riders of Hartford should not be compelled to pay more than five cents in order to give the company the funds which 1t may need on account of unprofitable operation of other lines.''
 The respondent claims that in es- tablishing the fare tariffs, the com pany. being legally consolidated and operated as a single system under one general management, should be treated as whole; that the book keeping an accounting system of the company Is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the h. terstate Commerce Commission and by this commission and is kept as a unit, affecting the company's entire operations, that the problems of pro- curing finances for the whole or any part of the system involves the earn ings, expenses, and valuation of the company's property as whole and the distribution of risk and casualty claims over the entire system.
 The respondent as a consolidated company is a legalized entirety char tered to serve the people of the state in all sections where its lines are operated. The advantages of a unified transportation system, serving the people located in different sec- ticns of the state, by physically con- nected and similarly operated lines, attach themselves to all portions of the system.
 The social and business success of individuals, societies and municipal- ties is to large extent interdepen- dent. The corporate boundary lines of a city do not enclose all the inhab itants upon whom the city is depen- dent for its business. soc'al and gen eral success and d syelopment. There is involved in it's economic life aud daily business transactions. largo percentage of people from the subur- ban and other sections outside of it's corporate limits. To impose a se- ve1e or prohibitive burden upon their access to the city would be not only