Daily Kennebec journal., 1925-08-20

ion of the public utilities commits
sion.
"The general manager of the pc
titioner frankly discloses a plan be-
tween the various lines that would
enable passenger taking one of the
petitioners motor cars at one section
of the state, to travel to any of the
principal settlements in the portion
of the state affected" continues the
decision.
ut does not appear that Aroos-
took county, or the extreme eastern
counties, are at present embraced
within the scope of the petitioners
ultimate plan.
For the purpose of this case, we
must view the matter an an intra-
state proposition, and in view of the
fact that the petitioner. has asked
for separate routes, 1t Is not VIOLA
tive of it's rights to treat these routes
individually, agreeably to the petit
toner's own method of presentation.
Never before has so complete
! system Of transportation by automo-
bile conveyance been presented to
the people of this state, as repre-
sented by its public utilities commits
sion. Its Importance and probable
consequences have constrained us to
give sustained attention and study
to the economic and legal princi-
pies involved.
Painstaking research has been
made of the analysis and attempt
ed solutions of this problem by stu
dents, enunciated in recognized
standard works and in the decisions
/ of commissions and courts through
out the country.
The petitioner asserts its inten-
| tion to render service by the opera
/ ton of motor busses of noticeable at
| tractiveness and capaciousness,
| equipped with the latest word in
safety appliances. sThe engine in the
coach is able to develop from eighty
| (SO) to eighty-five (S5) horse pow
er. The coach has chairs with in
| dividual cushions. seating two per-
sons; is capable of carrying twenty
six (26) passengers at one time; is
provided with a heating apparatus
for winter: with emergency doors,
and space for baggage.
Justice certainly requires us
to find that the transportation faci-
lities the petitioner offers in the way
of a coach equal those of any coach
| row operating upon the highways OF
this State and are superior to many.
The petitioner asserts that its traf-
fic will be built up by people who
do not now travel on either rail-
roads, street railways or public SER
vice motor cars, and confidently as
sert that its competition will not be
burdenSome. In other words. its as
sertion is expressive of the belief of
its managers that 1t will develop its
demand from people who either use
their private cars at the present time
or who seldom travel. In the course
of our study of this problem, in view
Of the petitioners statement, we
have given our attention to the pop
ulation in the territory included
within the petitioners proposed sys-
TEN.
I'VE shall not discuss at length the
proposed schedule of the petitioner
as it relates to each route. To do so
would amplify our order beyond
reasonable limits. We have, however.
considered the proposed schedule of
the petitioner and the existing
schedules of the competing utilities
and operators of public service mo-
tor vehicles. Truth impels us to say
that in many instances the service
of the petitioner. as tentatively Of
fered, would be a source of conven-
fence to people along the line.
1T was in evidence, however, that
the general manager of the petition
er who made up the schedule. had
done so from an examination of
map and knowledge of the run
ming time Of which his coach Is cap
able. He testified that he was not
% tn J, Of tho
routes over which he proposed to
operate.
1--WE shall assume that the pro-
posed schedules of the petitioner are
many times alluring, and If made ef-
fective and continuous, would pre-
sent service of convenience and
advantage to the Immediately local
public. 1t is clear, however, that such
service only would be continued as
would be supported by public travel,
and If the tentative schedule of the
petitioner were found to be so fire.
auent as to result in financial loss,
the petitioner would be obliged to
restrict and modify the schedule 1t
now proposes.
"On the other hand, II a public
need be shown sufficient to Justify
the Inauguration and maintenance of
service additional to what is now be-
ing rendered by other facilities and
public service motor cars, such
need, IL brought before the official
cognizance of this Commission,
would result in hearing and judg-
ment upon the facts and an order
reasonably indicated by such public
need.
"A hard hitting fact, however, is
that from none of the routes of the
proposed service of the petitioner