Evening star., 1950-05-04

first came to trial before Judge
Richmond B. Keech. The United
States Court of Appeals reversed
this decision and ordered the
trial to proceed.
Capital Transit Fails
To Challenge PUG
Figure on Pass Use
The assertion by the Public
Utilities Commissions top ac-
countant that the average number
OF riders per weekly pass is much
lower than the figure given by the
Capital Transit Co. remained
unchallenged by the company to-
day.
Hearings on the company s
plea for higher fares came to q
close late yesterday. AS the end
neared, the company offered evil
dence tending to indicate that. the
average rides per pass NAV be
even lower than the figures given
by V. A. McElfresh, executive ac-
countant for the commission.
Final arguments were brief and
were devoted almost entirely to
the question of the pass, which
the company has asked to abolish
Lawyers Argue on Pass.
2. Gloyd Await, company at
torney, argued that, on the basis
of evidence before the commits
sion, there is nothing to permit
the commission to retain the pass
in the fare structure.
Lloyd B. Harrison. counsel for
the commission. coiitended there
is nothing in the evidence v4 to
Justify discortinuance of the pass
tkar did not exist in earlier years,
when the company instituted the
pass and asked to retain it. In
the l948 rate case, which resulted
IN the present fares, the commits
sion considered abolishing the
pass. At that time. however, the
company argued for it's retention,
MIR. Harrison said the burden
OF proof for cutting out the pass
now rests on the company. John
O'Dea, peoples counsel, said there
is ample evidence for inclusion
OF the pass in the fare structure
15-Cent Fare Asked.
Besides asking for elimination
OF the pass. the company is ask
ing for a 15-cent cash fare with
tokens at six for 80 cents. Mr.
McElfresh has recommended q
15-cent cash fare, four tokens TO,
so cents and a 81 Is weekly pass
j. E. Heberle, controller Of the
company, in testifying in support
OF eliminating the pass, main.
tanned its use was abused" 6
word he corrected later to "mis.
used" He put the average mum.
Der Of rides per pass per week al
34.72 in !949.
Mr.. Heberle arrives at this fig
ure by dividing the number OF
passes sold into the total number
of pass riders
/ Mr.. McElfresh. however, put
the average number of rides a,
f25.6 per pass in the II months
ended October 81, 1s49. He ar
rived at this figure by taking 1917
per cent of the total number OF
pass riders before dividing it by
the number of passes sold.
This 1872 per cent figure i.
one used by the company fol
many years in arriving at the
number of riders considered as
revenue riders. The other 26k
per cent of pass riders are con.
sidered in the same category as
transfer riders.
Figure Inherited.
This figure was inherited BY
Capital Transit from one of it,
predecessor companies when the
present company was formed in 6
merger Is years ago. Mr.
Heberle has conceded the per.
centages may or may not be &C.
curate and has maintained thai
their chief value is that their con.
siStent use makes for comparable
statistics.
Yesterday the company callee
to the stand Dean l.. Locke, a com
pany engineer. He told of a sur
vey made on six bus and car line
last month. He said that for eacf
transfer presented there were tive
regular fares-caSh, tokens or 3.
cent school tickets. The result ot
this is to suggest that instead o.
the 2612 to 1872 ratio, the correct
ratio may be nearer 331s to 662s
Applying these percentages, tht
average number of rides per pas!
would be % instead of the 25E
Mr.. McElfresh reported and abou
33 per cent less than Mr.. Heberle'1
figures.
4 Both sides remarked that thu
33Ks per cent figure for allocatini
pass rides as equivalent to transfe,
rides may be too high. This i
because transfer riders mus
change at transfer points, while /;
pass rider may break his tril
wherever he wants.
Chairman James H. Flanagan
PUG chairman. has allowed thre,
weeks for the filing Of briefs.