Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-10-20
immediate Retaliation of
Street Railway Systems
Is Recommended.
ADVOCATES UNIFIED
OPERATION OF LINES
Increase in Rate Would Fail, peo-
Piles Counsel Says, by Re-
ducing Passengers.
Ralph B. Fleharty, peoples counsel

before the Public Utilities Commission.
took final and virile wallop yesterday
at the Capital Traction Co.'S applica-
ton for higher fare.
In 4,000-word brief, filed with the
commission, Fleharty commended that
the increased fare petition should be
dismissed lin the light of all existing
circumstances" and recommended an
immediate revaluation Of the properties
OF the street railway systen1a Of the
District
The brief, teeming with pertinent
comment on the transit situation, con-
tains a number of other recommends
tons, which, If carried out according
to the peoples counsel, probably would
remove the increased fare bugaboo, and
in all likelihood result in the long
sought merger of the street railway
lines
Fleharty firmly maintained that an
increase IN fare is not a solution of the
financial difficulties of the traction
companies as it undoubtedly would
cause decided reduction In pas
sengerS. and suggested as a better plan
unified or other improved methods
OF operation. In this connection, he
declared If the companies deliberately
fail to negotiate new merger agree.
ment their rights to relief they other.
wise might have probably will be
forfeited
I'm view of the downward trend in
revenue passengers" Fleharty said In
the conclusions in his brief, at Is be-
lieved that nothing should be done to
aggravate that condition. An increase
IN rates OF fare would do that, and
hence such step is not the solution
OF the difficulties being encountered by
the companies.
"A better plan than increased fares
would be to consider the financial berle-
fts that might accrue from unified
operation and other improved methods
OF operation. The employment Of ex-
pert traffic engineers for determining
probable benefits is recommended.
Would Forfeit Rights.
eff the companies deliberately fail to
negotiate new merger agreement it is
felt that they will forfeit whatever
rights to relief they might otherwise
have. Their responsibility is clear; it Is
to render the best possible service at the
lowest possible cost consistent with. TIE
earning OF reasonable return by the
companies. II they do not try TO effect
merger they fail to. give the public
these fundamentals. And, after an. any
method to alleviate financial stress of
solidation of the two principal systems
is but a nakeshift of temporary value
only, and in the long run futile"
In other conclusions, Fleharty recon-
mended that uniform accounting meth
DDS be ordered for both street railway
systems, which was done by the COM
mission lest week to become effective
January /. and that depreciation be ac-
crued on the same basis for both COM
psnies. He suggested the straight-line
method as being more in the interest Of
the public than the sinking fund
method.
Raises Legal Point.
Fleharty also raised a heretofore over
looked legal point in connection with
the higher fare application, that the
companies by their claim for financial
relief on the theory that the present
rate of fare constitutes confiscation of
property, while at the same time ask
ing for an increase which will not pro-
duce fair return. have waived their
right to appeal to the courts for an In
crease in the event the commission
denies the application.
while it is true that under the
pending applications both companies
have attempted to base their claim for
relief on the theory that the present
rates of fare constitute confiscation OF
the properties of the companies" File
harty said yet in view of the fact
that both companies in their briefs and
by their testimony make the positive
statements that the proposed increase
in fare would still therefore be con-
fiscatory, 1t is perfectly apparent that
neither of the applications Is based
upon the legal right Of the companies
to receive rate of fare which will
prevent confscation of their properties.
IG is submitted that in fact the real
basis OF the applications is as was stated
by the president of the Capital Trac-
ton Co. in his application made June
IA, 1928, which later became formal
case No. 2ol, in which letter he said:
Quotes Traction Company.
1.-THE Capital Traction Co. has de-
cided to ask now only for such relief
as Is required to meet its present urgeuE
needs and which Is further amplifeS
by his testimony in that case wherein
he stated: We decided that we would
not apply for rate to which we con-
sidered ourselves entitled at the present
time, and we based our claims on 3
SUFFICIENT amount to take care of our
per cent dividend requirement.
If. then, the present applicat tons are
not susceptible of sustaining the theory
lhaI inc companies are asking Tor their
legal rights namely, rate Of fare
which will produce a rate Of return
sufhcient to avoid confiscation, then the
applications. must of necessity be ad-
dressed only to the discretion Of the
Public Utilities Commission as q legis-
lative and not a judicial body; and, as
the companies have made out their
case. the commission is not required
to consider the question Of conf1scatiop.
Rate making Is legislative not q
judicial function, and courts do not Ak
rates except as incidental to finding
that rate fixed by a commission e
confiscatory. In the ordinary case the
only power or function of the courts
IS to NIX rate that would not be con-
nscatory, and to nix rate that is less
conflscatory than an existing rate but
which Is still admitted confiscatory and
unreasonable would be legislative ane
not judicial action and Something that
the Federal courts in the exercise of
jurisdiction under the fourteenth
amendment would not concern them
selves about. So that any appeal In
this case will arise by virtue of the
statutory right of appeal as fixed bv
the act of March 4, 1918, public. IItiIi-
ties act namely, the right of the courts
TO review from the standpoint of leRis-
alive reaSonableness the action Of the
public utilities commission II, passing
on legislative question. It Is coma
IDENTITY believed that from the Atand-
point OF public policy and public conc