Evening star., 1922-01-24
.H|NESDEN|ESROADS
WEREBROKENDOWN
Committee Told Government
0vermaintained
Equipment.

Assertions that the railroads were
turned back to their owners after
tho period of government control in
a "broken-down condition were denied
today by Walker D.. Hines in a state
ment before the interstate commerce
committee, in which the former di-
rector general OF railroads said he
believed the government had sub
stantially overmalntalned the equip
ment" of the roads.
Mr.. Hines told the committee, as a
witness in its general railroad in.
quiry, that reports at the end OF
federal control showed locomotives
to be in distinctly better" condition
than at the beginning and the con-
dltion of freight cars to compare
favorably" with that time. 1t must
be remembered, he added, that both
generally were in Exceedingly poor
condition at the beginning OF federal
operation.
Although there had been some
shortage of maintenance in rails,
crossties and ballast on some roads
Mr.. Hines said, this had been greatly
exaggerated" in the general discus
sion. There could be no better PROOF
of the condition of the roads when
turned back, the former director
volume .of business which they be-
gan to handle within four months
of that time, in 1920, without, he as
serted, any marked Improvement IN
the condition of the rolling stock.
Replies to Critics.
Stating that critics of the railroad
administration among the rail exec
utiyes appeared to take as start
ing point the idea that their equip
ment was in ideal condition. when
the government took control, Mr..
cited the testimony of President Rea
of the Pennsylvania Railroad Com
pany in 1917, in the advance rate
case before the Interstate Commerce
Commission. Mr.. Rea then declared
in effect, he said, that it had been
Impossible to maintain passenger car
equipment, that the continuous Serv-
ice of freight cars had left great
numbers in need Of repairs, and loco
motive repairs also had suffered from
inefficient and insufficient labor.
Although some who criticised the
administration maintenance policy
seemed to take the position that it
should have placed no limitation on
maintenance expenditures, Mr.. Hines
said, the government had adopted the
''perfectiy proper limitation" that
such amounts should correspond reason
ably with the governments contract OBJ
legations" except in unusual circum-
stances. In defense of this policy, the
former director general recalled that
every railroad strictly limits it's Off
GERS in maintenance expense. 1t was
better in doubtful cases for the gov
ernment to fall somewhat short of
the contract obligation in maintenance
allowance than to exceed it, he said,
because the contract expressly pro-
the ha or
case, whereas the governments claim
for excess was not so clearly estab-
lished.
Was "Overmafntafned.
Mr.. Hines said the railroad adminis-
tration had substantially overmain-
tained" rolling equipment generally
because it wanted the maintenance
put on equipment which it could i'm
mediatefy use. He contradicted a
made before the committee by Daniel
Willard. president of the Baltimore
and Ohio railroad. to the effect that
the administration had ordered a
change in the car repair standards,
asserting that the tests OF inspection
under federal-control were probably
more strict" fhan prior to it.
Comparing the efficiency of labor
under government control. the only
true basis for which, he said, after
the change to the eight-hour day was
the number OF man hours paid for"
Mr.. Hines declared that the traffic
units of service per man hour" had
1917 and 1918 and 100 in 1919. thus
showing more traffic units per man
hour than ever before" With this
start, in 1929. he said, the figure had
been increased to 101.
Quoting from the reports of re-