Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-03-24

Continued From First Page.D
is on record as having estimated at
about $l,000,000 per year.
"RuinOus" Competition Threatens.
There is another provision of the
proposed legislation to which very lit
tie attention has been paid. BY it the
merged company Is to be given reason-
able protection against ruinous compe-
tition. Already there is some of this
right now and more is threatened froJc
time to time.
IF the companies remain separate
and share the higher rate OF fare, it is
quite possible that public convenience
and necessity. may demand establish
ment Of competing parallel transporta-
ton lines. II this is urged by any one,
naturally the Public Utilities Commits
sion will be compelled to give it careful
consideration. 1t is not inconceivable
that with the higher fares the two
companies will be worse of than at
present"
After Gen. Patrick had read his state
ment to the committee, John H. Hanna,
president Of the Capital Traction Co.,
told the committee that he presumed
Gen. Patrick had reference to him
when the utilities chairman mentioned
the 81 ,000,000 estimate of savings under
the merger made by the president of
one of the companies"
Hanna Corrects Statement.
"The record of one of the committee
hearings year or two ago." Mr.. Hanna
said, shows that 1 did say the saving
might be as much as 100000, and
while don't deny having made such
statement, I must say have no recol-
lection OF 1t whatever and that I al
ways have been quoted elsewhere In
connection with much lower figures. /
thought had Always avoided using such
large figures because the probabilities
are against a saving anywhere nearly
approximating 100000. If I made
such an estimate before, and don't
deny 1t, had no idea it was to be taken
SO seriously and I wish now to cor
rect it,"
William S. Ham, president of the
washington Railway & Electric Co.,
spoke briefly in contradiction of an
estimate made earlier in the hearings
that the merger would result in an
immediate saving of $587,000.
Mr. Ham declared this estimate to
have been predicated on several incor-
OF the commissions contention that
$4,000 would be saved in overhead,
namely, salaries and similar adminiStra-
tive costs, pointing out that under the
bill the companies would have to bear
the cost Of a revaluation Of their prop
critics.
Power Saving Questioned.
A $4,000 saving in power costs, which
he said the commission held out as a
possible saving. was questioned by the
Witness w IlnHnr~
standing that the cost of power to the
merged company was to be the same as
the cost to the separate companies.
The commissions reference to an in
terest saving of 100000 also was chal-
lenged, Mr.. Ham asserting that the in
tereSt to be paid after the merger would
be exactly what 1t is today.
The whole question of interest saw
ings, he declared, SIS irrelevant" The
saving in traffic policemen is
doubtful" Mr.. Ham continued, since
the estimate was based on police costs
Of two years ago, before the automatic |
signals were installed. The companies
have been saved $4,000 in |
salaries Of special policemen since the |
lights were placed In operation, he |
stated
George p, Hoover, attorney for the |
Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. |
and the Washington Rapid Transit Co., |
appeared before the committee to pro- |
test against the provision OF the merger !
bill which defines the rights OF utilities |
TO appeal from decisions OF the COM |
Opposes "ArbltrAry" Power.
Mr. Hoover said he understood from |
the bill that an appeal could be taken l
10 the court only regarding matters Of |
law, and that no appeal was to be per-