Evening star., 1920-02-18
TRACTION MERGER
HERE IS FAVORED
BY BEN JOHNSON
Ranking Democrat on D. C.
Committee Does Not Favor
Commissioners Bill.
SAYS CAPITAL NO PLACE
FOR PUBLIC OWNERSHIP
States Position in Discussing Legal
Phases With Mr.. Hamilton
at Hearing.

at nearing.
Representative Ben Johnson of Ken
lucky, formerly chairman of the
House District committee and now
the ranking democrat. is heartily in
favor of merger of the street rail-
way lines in Washington. IL il can bo
brought about in way equitable to
all parties at interest. Representa-
tive Johnson made this statement at
the hearing by the House District
committee today on the Commission
ers' bill designed to bring about
merger. He. however. stated that he
does not approve the District Com
missionerS' bill.
Representative Johnson said that he
is convinced that If there is any place
in the world where there ought not
to be municipal ownership, il is In the
District of Columbia. The fiscal rela-
tions here forbid 1t, he said. Mr..
Johnson stated that he is of open
mind on the subject of how to relieve
the street railway situation in the
National Capital. and that he is try
ing to find way in which a merger
can be forced and still be equitable.
Debate Legal Aspects.
in the course of a debate with George
E. Hamilton, president of the Capital
Traction Company. on legal aspects
of the situation. Mr.. Hamilton con-
tended that Congress has absolute
right to revoke the franchise of either
or both of the street railway systems
when it wills. He insisted, however.
that this merely means stoppage OF
tkaH
Congress can destroy property rights
and interests which have been built
up in consequence of authority given
by Congress to either street railway
company to seek investment, TO sell
stocks and bonds and to make contracts
of every character necessary to opera
ton of the street railway system un-
der the franchise.
Chairman Mapes went at consider
able length into a discussion of the
hydraulic company case in Grand
Rapids, and read extracts from the
Supreme Court decision, which. he
contended, was applicable in the Dis
trict street railway problem. Ar.
Hamilton. however, contended that
the Supreme Court decision was given
only on one phase OF the Grand
Rapids case, which he conceded in The
present case-the right to revoke the
franchise.
Representative Johnson repeated to-
day a suggestion which he had pre-
yiously made and which had been
taken as though not seriously meant
This was that a way might be found
to induce the Washington Railway
and Electric Company to buy out the
Capital Traction Company. He told
Mr.. Hamilton that he had understood
him to testify that the Capital Trac-
tion Company did not care to pur-
chase the Washington Railway Spd
Electric Company.
willing to Buy Out Competitor.
He said that William F. Ham, pres
ident of the Washington Railway and
Electric Company, had intimated, il
he had not actually said, that his COM
pany would be willing to buy the
Capital Traction If they could AFFORD
it. Mr.. Johnson thought that the
method of forcing a merger might be
along the lines of least resistance il
q way was found whereby the WASH
ington Railway and Electric Company
was authorized by Congress through
condemnation proceedings to take
over the Capital Traction Company
and asway found to pay for 1t.
Later in the hearing, on the sugges-
ton of John H. Hanna, vice president
of the Capital Traction Company. Mr..
Hamilton put into the record state
ment that he had never meant to say
that the Capital Traction Company did
not care to take over the Washington
Railway and Electric Company. He
said what he had meant to say was
that he understood the Washington
Railway and Electric Company was not
for sale, and that he did not care to
take from them their rights success
fully to operate. il conditions are made
favorable for them. He said the ques-
ton of sale would be predicated on a
number of conditions.
Representative Johnson said en-
phatically that he does not like that
part of the Commissioners bill which
proposes to build third street railway
system in Washington, nor would he
approve municipal ownership of cars
and other equipment which would be
leased to either or both - the existing
Three Apparent Objects.
Mr.. Johnson told Mr.. Hamilton he
would be glad il he would analyze the
Commissioners bill. MIR. Hamilton
said that there are three apparent
o objects-one, to change the method
of taxation; two, providing for a
merger, and. three, creating a fund
for the construction of future exten-
sions, municipality owned, and apply
Mr.. Hamilton discussed at length
the tax feature as being Objectionable
and unjust. He put into the record
his understanding of Engineer Com
missioner KutZ's testimony that the
tax feature in the COMMISSIONER bill
is primarily for the purpose Of fore
ing a merger. Mr.. Hamilton said that
it is unfair to shift the tax so as en-
tirely to relieve one company and put
the entire tax on the other company.
Mr.. Hamilton said also that the
Capital Traction Company did not
apply for the higher fare, but that
The Public Utility Commission thought
it was power,ess to grant it to one
railway and not TO the other. He said
that .the fare should be the same on
both lines. He said there was an
element cf injustice that the Capital
Traction riders are called upon to
paw a fare larger than is necessary
to meet expenses and reasonable
return on the investment in the
Capital Traction Company. Mr.. Hamil-
ton pointed out that the Commis-
sioners' bill proposes to recapture this
excess fare allowed by the Public
Utilities Commission, not for the pur-
pose of restoring IL to those who paid
il. but to build up extensions,
owned. or according to