The Bridgeport times and evening farmer., 1920-02-26

We claim that a1tnOugh the Zone l System is aimed at curing this injus- | tice and that it does somewhat on the face of it appear to distribute the
 cost more eQuitably, yet even under
 the Zone System the people of Bridge
 port are paying more than the cost | of that service. We also assert that the Connecticut Company are not de irving any more income from the City | of Bridgeport under the zone Sys- | tenn. This is due to the loss of pas sengers to the jitneys. We have not been shown by the Connecticut Com 1 pany that we were wrong in the as
 sertion that the Connecticut Com | pany were not receiving an increase income here though the information was specifically requested at tn hearing. It is quite noteworth, feature Of the Company's prima facie case that they are operating under a system which will secure the results that they desire and which they claim to establish by evidence of their increased receipts for November 1919 that this characteristically discounts the items of public service and fails to satisfy as to what proportion of their passengers have been lost.
 The Zone System has played havoc with traffic in Bridgeport. During the rush hours of the afternoon it is quite customary to find a line of . trolleys from State to Congress streets on Main street in this city: This con- gestion has further reacted upon the service to the public and it is ! common event for several cars to come along in succession to be fol- lowed in twenty-five minutes by an other possibly. This is not idle hear say but is amply supported by tes- timony in the record. We claim that the Zone System is not a practical working system. It was quite sur prising to find the officials of the Company so enthusiastic over it's mer- : it's, inasmuch as other Zone Systems l throughout the country have failed 1 utterly.
 i The claim of the City of Bridgeport I was very ably presented by Mayor 1 c. B. Wilson at the hearing in this
 city. He favored the segregation of ! the local lines from Southport on the l one side to Devon on the other (Rec- ord page S63), with a five cent fare
 within the corporate limits and some
 additional charge outside. He ar
 gued that these were paying lines and
 would yield a profit on a five cent
 fare. I quote his theory from his
 testimony (page S54 of the record)
 
 can give life and sustenance to the
 trolley on a five cent fare should be permitted to do so, and if there be locations in this State where that cannot be done, then treat those To- cations in accordance with. the needs , which they demand. If there is ai6 or assistance that must be given then :, it should not come from territorie: that are seIf-support>-g put from the State itself, if the Commission deem. such thing wise and proper, bu 2 not to take it from those people l whose use of the trolley is such anc whose payment of a five cent fare f = in sufficient quantity to enable tn 3 trolley company, in so far as tha t particular locality is concerned, t l continue to exist" etc.
 l 3-To summarize our case we of
 fer the following propositions: l a-The time has arrived for = change of State policy regarding troI = | leys and it is no longer equitable t j., treat the system as whole; but tha }, l the Public Utilities Commissio 0 should disapprove any scheme of op = eration which does not recognize an e distinguish the paying lines from tn ? non-paying lines.
 t b-If the State wishes to continu
 
 q the general welfare of the common e wealths then this loss should be born s by general taxation, i. e., by State aiC h Ct is unreasonable to assume tha e the population would be willing t T pay the cost of the service.)
 l. c-Permission is asked to have tn Il Connecticut Company make a tes J. upon the local lines of the Connec l. ticut Company including to Devon O 1T the East and Southport on the We! tt under five cent fare in the Cit y limits, with a charge of one cent fc e a transfer, with two five cent zone e on either side of the City, i. e., te 1t cents to Stratford and Fairfield an r. fifteen cents to Devon and Southpor
 respectively.
 e- d-We further assert the failure , " the Zone System as conductive l. good service to the public or of be in ter financial result to the Come a ticut Company in Bridgeport. at Respectfully submitted, of W. PARKER SHELBY, y. Assistant City Attorney