New Britain herald. [microfilm reel] (New Britain, Conn.) 1890-1976, 1923-08-01
WHAT SHALL WE DO WITH THE
RAILROAD?

WHAT SHALL WE DO WITH THE
RAILROADS?
The States of Connecticut, of al
New England states, is most depend.
ant upon the New Haven road fol-
the maintenance of its welfare. Its
factories demand quick and efficient
railway service, its individuals demand
coal and foodstuffs, steadily and as
cheaply as possible. With practically
all of our raw products being deliver
ed from a distance, with practically
all of our finished products to be de-
livered at varying distances, the only
thing that insures our financial and
even physical welfare is adequate
freight service which should be
furnished by the New York, New
Haven and Hartford r. r. True we
use automobile trucks for some of our
transportation, but they carry small
proportion indeed of our daily food
any state that is more at the mercy
of its railroad than is Connecticut,
and that road has been showing signs
of decentralization, at least, for a num-
Der of years.
Granted that we must have some
railroad to furnish transportation,
which surely is not a difficult .conces-
sion to make. there is but one road
to which we can look and that is, of
course, the New Haven. There is no
prospect of another being built; 1t
would be foolishness to attempt to
build one with the New Haven on
hand. despite its weaknesses. The
only recourse offered to us is the re-
building, the re-equipping, of the
existing system of transportation, and
we have but to decide how far we are
going in this necessary move.
We have the option of raising a
large sum of money, aided by nearby
states, which would amount to some
100000 year in payments for i'm
provements in equipment in addition
to the payments of interest and sink
ng funds on a bond issue, or we might
see fit to take over and control the
roads as a state institution. Rhode
Island and Massachusetts, joining us
n this.
There are decided weaknesses in |
both plans. The first one would be a
great expense, and we should have
difficulty in making certain that the |
arge sum of money subscribed and |
'eturned in rebates would be ade-
luately managed under the trustee
hip. We might not have the control |
We should have over the funds. Prac-
ically the same question comes UP in |
with the second plan; we |
ire dubious of these state controlled
matters. Natural weaknesses of poll
icians might add to the expense of
unning the road; such things have
But if we have to preserve
ur industrial entity we have to have
railroad; again we say 1t.
1t seems almost impossible to de-
ermine how we are to insure our
DAD, how we are to extend the CO.
peration it must have. Undoubtedly
he Storrow committee has chosen
that it considers the best possible
leans of giving the aid. 1t could not
ct for individuals it has suggested
tate action. Why would it not be
ossible for a combine to be formed
rom the manufacturing interests of
onnecticut, Rhode Island and Massa-
husetts, the combine to take over
peration of the roads and to supply
ne necessary funds for that purpose?
or selfish interests alone such a
ombine would be anxious to operate
minimum of expense with a max
mum of efficiency. With it's own I
oney involved it would see that the
ost possible value is received from
lie funds expended.
Such move must be sponsored by l
e manufacturing interests them
Ives the public has no right to de-
and that they act. There would be :
any details to settle, such as the
lestion of ultimate ownership of the
ad, the division of any possible
offs between the operators and the
esent stock holders and so forth.
1T we believe that it might be pos r
Die to get better railroad out of I
CHI a scheme than from the others,
en- though either one might eventu- r
Iy prove practical. t