Evening star., 1960-05-06
T RANSIT

Continued From First Page
firms out of business. But a uni
fed approach is essential, he
told the committee.
He strongly opposed public
ownership or operation of tran
sit facilities. He also voiced
skepticiSm about the economic
prospects of a subway, but un-
der questioning, said a Wash
ington underground system
would be useful. He also assert
ed it would be as justifiable a
Governmental project as costly
highways:
OverempnasiS on highways to
serve private. automobiles was
blamed by Mr.. Chalk for part
of the present transit diff
culties. He also criticized what
he labeled shear inactivity" on
the part of public officials in
trying to work out transit traf-
fic problems.
Mr.. Chalk charged that it
would be unfair and uncon-
stitutional" for Congress to
take away rights given to his
company in 1856 for what he
called trunk line operation"
Tree Is Comparison
Likening the transit system
to a three kept alive by its
trunk. he declared
THE proposed subway sys-
tenn would couc out our trunk
and leave us a lot of uncon-
nected branches"
8 The only alternative to going
out Of business in the face of
subway competition, he said, is
such a scheme as he is propos-
ing for private operation of
the underground facilities.
r "Our greatest concern at
D. c. Transit" Mr.. Chalk told
the committee, "iS that after
three years the magnificent
properties and equipment of
D. c. Transit may be acquired
by the governmental authority
by condemnation"
He said if Congress feels sim
gle operation of all transit in
the area is inevitable, private
firms should be advised imme-
diately and permitted to sus-
pend plans for investing in
additional equipment and prep
aration for public ownership.
He said Congress would have
to provide adequate compensa-
ton.
Scouts Cost Estimates
James H. Flanagan, transit
vice president, questioned Bu-
reau of the Budget figures in
dicating that a subway system
could get on a self-Sustaining
basis by 1880. He called this
IAN utter impossibility" on the
basis of his calculations and
charged that the Budget Bu-
reauS transit plan embodied in
the pending bill grossly un-
derstatesp expenses.
Representative Broyhill, Re-
publican of Virginia, said he
agreed with Mr.. Chalk's view
that anfintegrated transit sys-
tenn would be the most efficient
butt said he hoped it was not
D. c. Transit's intention to try
and drive out or take over other
companies. He said he would
not go along with any such
effort.
Area officials and legislators
indorsed the transit objective
yesterday.
Most Of yesterdays witnesses,
however, wanted changes in the
bllie drafted by the Bureau of
the Budget which would set up
machinery for the transit de-
velopment.
Terms of the bill, which
would create a temporary Fed
eral transit agency followed by
either an interstate contract
organization or a Federal COR
poratlon, were defended by Ell
mer B. Stats. deputy budget
director.
ofhcial District, Maryland
and Virginia spokesmen all
urged reworking the provisions
OF the bill to give the three
jurisdictions more time to try
% agree on a compact. The
Budget Bureau has proposed
a 1868 deadline, but the local
leaders urged deferring it at
least to 1865.
State Senators Charles R.
Fenwick of Virginia and Ed
ward S. Northrop of Maryland
and the District Commissioners
also urged revamping the pro-
posed agencies to give them
f0IF-Ynan hnorJe oF j;,aa4.,