Evening star., 1921-07-31

to 8 cents per kilowatt hour This is
urged on behalf of the Washington Rail-
way and Electric Company, ss a means
of making up the deficits in the railway
operations Of that company. The WASH
iRston Railway and Electric Company
owns or controls and operates several
street railway companies, and is like
wise the owner of all of the stock Of the
Potomac Electric Power Company. but
is prohibited by express act Of Congress
from owning and acquiring the property
of the Potomac Electric Power Company.
The Washington Railway and Electric
Company and the Potomac Electric
distinct corporations, furnishing differs
ent classes of service to different groups
of customers. Even though the com
panies were combined there Is no Justin-
cation either in law or in equity that
one class of consumers be required to
pay higher rate than the company
service is worth In order that consumers
Of an entirely distinct class may enjoy
a lower rate than they would otherwise
have to pay"
Uniform Fare Explained.
With respect to the new street car
rate, the commission, in Its order, ex-
plains why uniform rate had been
adopted for both the Washington
Railway and Electric and Capital
Traction Company systems. the Or
der says, in part:
'The Chairman announced at the
opening of the hearings that there
were three questions before the com
mission in this case. which It desired
to have discussed. One was the ques-
sens Associations. in which it was
implied that the commission, in here.
tofore establishing a single rate OF
fare on the street railway Lines in the
District of Columbia had exceeded its
powers under the law: The second
Commission has been within us rights
and is free to fix a single rate Of
fare for all the street railway lines,
shall the present rates be continued.
as pstiti0nsd for by the Washington
Railway and Electric Sompany. OF
said Sy other ta opsanisations: Tss third
question was: Shall these changes,
fective on the S1st day Of August.
when the present order expires, OF
shall they become effective at some
earlier date?
After carefully reviewing the rec
ord in this case and weighing the
arguments presented on the first
question, the eOmmission 10 firmly OF
the opinion that 1t has acted within
the law in establishing a single rate
lines within the District of Columbia.
and that it's action ip SO doir ''"s
fully justified in the circuT'
Returns Were AveFnHes.
I'm connection with the second ques-
ton, the testimony of the Washington
Railway and Electric Company was to
the effect that under the present rates
Of fare it had earned q return of 5,53
per cent on it's fair value for the year
ended May 81. 1921. The evidence sub
mitted by the Calital Traction Com
pany shows that for the year ended
April 80, 1921, the rate of return was
1853 per cent. According to calcula-
tions made by the commission, the re-
suit for the Capital Traction Company
TOR the year ending MAY II. 1891. gives
q rate Of return of 1q1 ~ per cent.
If the two principal street railway
companies be considered as one, and
their operations during the period
be found that they have earned on the
average a return of 7.RS per csnt on
their combined fair values, or. u de-
duction from fair value be made for
accrued since the date of
the commissions valuation Of the
properties (July l, 1910, the return
becomes $40 per cent.
"The commission believes that a re-
duction in the rate of fare is justified
from the evidence in this case, and
after considerating the effect on the
revenues Of the combined companies.
reaches the conclusion that the token
fare shQnld be rsdueed from IN cents
to cents, the cash fare to rematn
inter-company transfers to continue"
: Il,