Evening star., 1928-12-07
The Maltbie Analysis.

| k9uHkll1SolOtl W bAAC OCtAUeC DAcN ~
committee yesterday of the detailet
analysis of the proposed merger agree
ment by DR.. Milo r. Maltbie complete
| the preliminary evidence upon which
the committee must base its decision
and opens the way for the hearing
soon to begin and which, 1t is to b.
hoped. will result in congressional ap
proval of merged operation of the trac
ton lines at this session of Congress
The Maltbie report, which adds another
Endorsement to the principle of merger
but cites various objections to the
present form of agreement, is a care.
fully prepared document which the
Senate committee will find most valuable
in its task of weighing all the considera-
tiors involved. 1t represents many
months of labor by man whose reputa-
ton as an expert in such matters en-
titles him to speak with authority.
The outstanding difference between
the Maltbie report and the report OF
the Bureau of Efficiency is found in the
controversial subject of valuation for
making purposes. Throughout the
long discussion of the merger proposal
this has been the chief stumbling block.
When the Senate committee has de-
cided the correct procedure in this re-
gard, the remaining issues may be solved
with comparative ease. DR.. Maltbie is
unwilling to accept the compromise
valuation of $4,000, 900 which the trac-
ton companies have volunteered to set
for the merged company. He does not
take the view of the District Public
Utilities Commission nor that of the
Bureau of Efficiency, both of which
granted the fact that by going into
court the traction companies could OBJ
tain even higher figure than the
$50,000,000, and, in addition, that
resort to the courts would endanger any
prospect of an immediate merger be-
cause of the lengthy litigation.
On the other hand, DIR. Maltbie not
only believes that the traction COM
panies would fail to receive judicial
authority for any such figures as
$50,000,o00, but suggests that the whole
matter Of valuation for rate-makine
purposes be left out of the merger
agreement. He believes there is dan.
ger of having fixed valuation writer
into the agreement. The alternative he
proposes is to drop that matter now
bring the merger into effect and treat
with the question of valuation and fares
when it arises. There is little doubt
that it would arise Immediately.
DR.. Maltbie is of the opinion that q
rate-making valuation written into the
agreement to last for ten years would
during the decade, serve to tie the
hands of the regulatory bodies dealing
with transportation and public utilitie,
in the District. This regulatory power
should be jealously guarded. If, as DR.
Maltbie suggests, an agreement on val
uation at this time threatens the power
of Congress and the Public Utilities
Commission to prevent increases in fare
later, possibly justified by fixed valua-
ton. open to question, he has raised
an issue which the car-riding public
will look to Congress to settle.
DR.. Maltbie's report must not be re-
garded either as blow" at the merger
agreement or as o cause for lengthy
delay in the ratification Of some agree
ment. It merely constitutes another
one of the valuable analyses Of the
question which Congress has received
before proceeding to its final step. 81
vital is the effect of the merger upor
Washington that no pains should b'
spared to obtain and to study all o.
its many issues.