Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-05-08
Efficiency Group Lacks
knowledge" and Is Preiu-
diced, Commission Says.
12-PAGE REPLY TAKES
UP ALL CONVENTIONS
Cites Act of 1918 as Giving It's
Orders Full Force Over Any
Municipal Ordinance.


replied to the attack made on it by
the Bureau of Efficiency recently, in
which the commission was accused of
| usurping the traffic directors powers
with a savage counter attack charging
the bureau with "a sad lack of knowl-
edge" and accusing it of bias and
prejudice.
In a closely written 12-page report,
the Utilities Commission takes up, one
by one, the instances cited by the
Efficiency Bureau to support its claim
that the traffic situation in town was
being tangled by encroachments on the
power of the traffic director. Accom-
panying this report the commission
sent to the Board of District Commits
sioners a letter, part of which reads:
Believes Control Needs Study.
This commission desires to go on
record as believing that traffic control
in this city needs study, and that con-
ditions can be greatly improved by in
telligent control.
so far as this report of the Bureau
of Efficiency Is concerned. it shows a
sad lack of knowledge of many perth
nent facts. 1t criticizes this commits
sion, apparently without having made
any attempt to ascertain what, If any,
| reasons existed for the taking of the
actions which 1t condemns. The whole
report Is merely a biased statement of
opinions, conclusions and attempts to
interpret statutes, such as might be ex-
pected from a special pleader, but not
from an unprecedented investigator seek
ing to bring out all of the facts before
formulating his recommendations"
Harland's Rights Disputed.
The report states that the act of
1913 creating the Public Utilities Com
mission that when any order of the
Commission shall be made which shall
be inconsistent and repugnant to any
municipal ordinance, the order of the
Commission shall be given full force
and effect Notwithstanding such NUM-
cipal ordinance" This law was still in
force when the 1925 traffic act was
passed and the traffic act specifically
left the public utilities act unrepealed
The traffic act sets out the duties and
powers of the traffic director and since
1t contains no clause stating that the
act is to be interpreted literally, the
result Is that the directors powers must
be closely confined to those enumerated
in the act, the commission finds. This
being the case, the trafic director has
no power whatever to route traffic, ex-
cept in one particular, as he Is given
in one section the right to close streets
under certain conditions. He is not
given the power to set aside space in
the public street for parking of buses
and so forth.
Bus Proposals Derided.
The commission poured cold water
on the bureaus suggestion that the
trafflc director be given exclusive power
over all BUSES, including intracity,
interstate, sightseeing and other types,
and that the commission be consulted
only in the case of intracity buses.
Carriers cannot arbitrarily be assigned
for purpose of discussion into intra-
District and interstate groups" the re-
port reads, such classification ignores
facts.
Many lines engage in both classes Of
service with the same equipment. More
over, the routing of interstate lines has
direct and material effect on the
operation of inter-district lines"
The commission calls into question
the ethics of the Bureau of Efficiency
involved in its statement that there is
IAN utter lack of any jurisdiction" in
the commission over interstate buses.
This question is now before the Court
of Appeals for decision.
The utilities commission must have
unhampered power to route the car
riers under its jurisdiction since the
routing selected by the director of traffic
solely with reference to traffic condi-
tons might very well have a disastrous
effect upon the pocketbook of the bus
company and consequently on that of
its riders If forced to travel in unprofit-
able territory.
In the case Of the car track at STAN
ton Square, the report goes on, the
director of traffic has routed vehicle
traffic in direction opposite to that
long taken by the street cars. Follow
ing fatal accident the traffic director
recommended putting in "cross-over"
reversing the direction of the street cars
around the square. This would have
cost not less than $4,000 at a time
when the company could Ill afford to
spend the money and the recon-
mendation was made without ref
erence to the convenience of the
patrons of the line Vehicular trsfic is
similarly routed opposite to street car
trafhc on the west side of Dupont Cir
Gle, on E street between Thirteenth and
Fourteenth and at other points.
Claim Lines Revenue Was Hit.
In November, 1927, an interstate bus
line asked permission to establish a
waiting room at 1411 New York avenue
The commission favored this, but the
traffic director objected and the perrnis-
sion was denied. This line was then
routed to 1886 New York avenue. but
was forced out of that location by COM
petition. The report says that the traffic
directors opposition to the establish
ment OF Its own terminal seriously
affected the revenue of this line.
nsHcc
mission states that it has never routed
any OF them, but that they are COM
mon carriers and that there can be no
valid contention that they do not come
under the powers of the Utilities Com
mission.
The Bureau of Ef1ciency's report
which criticized the District Commits
sioners themselves for usurping the
powers Of the traffic director has stirred
up one of the most involved contro-
versies in years at the District Build
ing. Traffic Director william H Har-
land reported that he agreed with the
Efficiency Bureaus views and was
ready to draft a new set of regulations
putting the recommendations into eff
feet.
Maj. Henry G. Pratt, superintendent
Of police. complained that although the
traffic act puts the traffic director under
control of the major and superintendent
of police, such control has never in fact
been exercised and asked the Commits
sioners to seek an opinion from the cor
poration counsel as 10 the respective
jurisdiction of the h&Ads Of the TRAFFIC
and Police Departments.