1922 Date Page Wm. McK. Clayton to urge free transfers between District of Columbia car lines.. Commission notifies traction companies car merger law may be needless in opinion of cor- Corporation counsel rules car lines have legal right to merge.. Public Utilities Commission notifies Congress it concurs in merger ruling- Commission reports to House bill to incorporate Washington Rapid Transit- Washington Railway & Electric note holders' committee discusses sale of stock. Roger Babson issues circular on Washington Railway & Electric common shares.. Representative Focht says car merger now near. Senate passes bill to permit trolley merger here.. Commission renews fight in Senate against car merger bill. Senator Jones withdraws reconsideration demand on merger bill.. Merger bill action hangs on adjournment.. Senate passes Ball trolley merger bill.. District of Columbia rail merger bill denounced by George E. Hamilton. Citizens' associations plan joint drive against one-man cars.. Aug. 16 2 Utilities Commission plan for District of Columbia car merger up in House. Sept. 19 Sept. 30 28 (Almost daily articles on one-man cars.) Unnamed persons buy 37,500 Washington Railway & Electric shares. Nov. 5 Fidelity and Deposit Co., of Baltimore, bids too late for Washington Railway & Electric shares. 1 Denial that Capital Traction Co. bought 27,500 shares Washington Railway & Electric.. Nov. 6 Senator Jones hopes for early action on merger.. Senator Couzens favors District of Columbia owned street car lines.. Senator Couzens says District of Columbia should own and run car lines.. Nov. 7 22421112 1923 Senator McKellar to renew fight on street car fares in next Congress.. Do... Jan. 27 ...do.. Jan. 28 15 Representative Hammer introduces bill for District of Columbia railway merger. Jan. 29 Jan. 30 Jan. 1 Commission in letter to Senator Phipps says tax revision will cut fares. Commission says railway maintenance of pavements and traffic policemen unfair. Feb. 1 2 2 Senator Couzens before Federation of Citizens' Associations talks on street-car problems. Commissioner Keller says people's attitude toward utilities is exaggerated. Senator Ball promises to give attention to District of Columbia car situation.. Senator McKellar to demand amendment to car merger bill for fare cut. Apr. 17 Senator McKellar issues a statement scoring Washington Railway & Electric dividends. Apr. 27 19 Action to be taken this fall on street car merger. Sept. 12 Federation of Citizens' Associations asks half fare for school pupils. Commission denies plea for half fare for school children.. Commission no authority for half fare for school children. District of Columbia officials to again ask car-line merger. Major Bell favors hearing on street railway merger... 1924 Washington Railway & Electric Co. employees to have privilege of buying stock, beginning tomorrow. 1924 Date Page Senator McKellar before committee on 5-cent car fare bill, scores watered stock of traction lines. Commissioners disapprove half fare for school children. Wm. McK. Clayton before commission hearing of 10-cent bus fare claims bus lines hurt street cars. Hard to solve our street railway problem justly. Senator Ball introduces bill to merge District of Columbia street-car companies and bus companies... 1925 Senator McKellar to renew fight for 5-cent fare in District of Columbia. Washington Railway & Electric Co. and Washington Rapid Transit Co. contest for cross-town bus line.. Joint subcommittee to consider street car merger next week. Jan. 15 District of Columbia Commissioners tell Senator Ball Washington Rapid Transit should be included in street-car merger. Jan. 21 Rail and bus heads testify before subcommittee on merger. Jan. 23 Wm. Ham and G. E. Hamilton oppose traction merger before joint subcommittee. District of Columbia traction and bus heads declare Ball compulsory merger bill unconstitutional. ...do.. Jan. 24 Feb. 2 Feb. 4 ...do.. Feb. 5 Resolutions in Senate questions Utilities Commission granting street railways bus permits.. Senator Norris asks probe of propaganda against public ownership of utilities. Feb. 6 Commission backs voluntary car merger plan.. Feb. 10 Senator McKellar offers amendment to car-merger bill for 5-cent fares. Senator Copeland attacks granting Washington Railway & Electric Co. cross-town bus line. Feb. 10 Feb. 11 Washington Railway & Electric Co. authorized to operate cross-town bus line. Washington Railway & Electric Co. and Capital Traction Co. officials meet on merger.. 12 1 Traction-merger experts to canvass public. Apr. 26 1 Survey will show all transit needs. Apr. 28 3 Engineers surveying utilities noting parking conditions. May 6 7 Survey of District of Columbia transportation facilities to begin to-morrow. May 10 9 Prospects favorable for local traction merger. Transfer situation to be scanned in transportation survey. Public responding to transportation queries. May 18 4 District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia traction and bus officials discuss merger.. 1,000,000 to live in District of Columbia's present area, transportation survey shows. Merger of District of Columbia traction lines hinges on survey New York. Sept. 19 Congress must approve merger steps. do... Traction merger in future planned following survey. Rerouting awaits merger decisions. Sept. 22 Edwin Gruhl of North American Co. says traction survey will show possibility of service improvement. Sept. 30 Transportation report received by commissioners. do Citizens' views may be asked on street-car merger. Oct. 8 North American Co. official confers with Public Utilities Commission; merger move seen. Citizens' advisory council gives plan for separate Public Utilities Commission.. Commission sends merger progress report to Senator Capper. Senate District Committee may ask details on merger progress.. Major Covell before Takoma Park citizens sees traction merger. Representative Zihlman before Chamber of Commerce urges voluntary traction merger. 1926 Bell tells House subcommittee bill fruitless. Covell cites business weapon to force.. Jan. 19 George E. Hamilton says merger prospect bright. do... Public Utilities Commission awaits traction merger proposal.. Feb. 3 Washington Railway & Electric says merger progressing. Ham urges congressional action to aid merger. House committee to hold hearings on merger.. Major Covell testifies before House committee Traction merger believed near. Apr. 6 1 Commission impatient at failure to get data.. Merger legislation postponed to December by Senate committee. Merger being considered.. Plans for forcing merger taking shape. Aug. 12 1 Public hearing by commission on merger on Wednesday. Public hearing by commission held on merger.. Ham opposes merger.. Legislation planned to force merger. North American Co. has a plan. Commissioner Rudolph opposes service at cost. Increased taxes threatened to force merger... Utilities commission to study bill to-morrow- Advisory council doubts validity of forced merger.. Merger bill introduced in the Senate and House. 1927 Fares held chief block to merger.. Bus and car merger seen in triangle development.. Advisory Council O.K.'d merger bill. Washington Railway & Electric annual report urges merger on service-at-cost basis- Mr. WILSON. Now, Mr. Chairman, I promised a brief statement, and I will make it as brief as possible. There appears to be in some quarters some confusion as to just what this unification agreement contemplates. From the standpoint of the business man, from the standpoint of the experienced public utility man, from the standpoint of the average business man and the man experienced in public utility industry, confusion would naturally be less than in the mind of the individual person unfamiliar with business in general and public utility business primarily. The fact is, however, that there is nothing very complicated in this situation. I am going to try to make it clear to you as I view it, just what this plan contemplates. There has been a good deal of talk here about altruism on the part of the companies, in the form of certain valuation. That is not true. This is a business proposition pure and simple. These companies > contend-and by "these companies" I mean the Washington Railway & Electric Co. and the Capital Traction Co.-that the present value of their principal properties devoted to transportation in the metropolitan area of the District of Columbia is something in excess of $62,000,000; and the rate base of $50,000,000 was written into this agreement not because the companies had any change of heart as to the value of their property, or because they were actuated by altruistic motives. The $50,000,000 base was written into this unification agreement because the companies recognized as public utility operators that their first duty to the public and to themselves is to secure a return such as their property is entitled to, not from a legal standpoint but from an operating standpoint; that the efficiency of their properties is their care and charge, not that of the public. Hence if by unit operation, economies of, say, $840,000 a year could be enjoyed, certainly those economies could be reflected in the obligation of the public to maintain the public utility. Now, it just is a coincidence-it was not figured out just that way originally-that when the rate base of $50,000,000 was fixed, the difference between that as a rate base on the claimed valuation by these companies of their properties for rate-making purposes, was $12,000,000-7 per cent on which the company believes is a fair return for capital invested in the public utilities business. That 7 per cent on $12,000,000 happens to figure $840,000. I want to make it clear to this committee that the $50,000,000 rate base written into this unification agreement gives the companies the same value for rate-making purposes after unification has occurred that the $62,000,000 valuation for rate-making purposes gives them under multiple operation and control. In other words, if you please, this $50,000,000 rate base is for the purpose of the unification. If there is no unification by action of the Congress or otherwise, there is no waiver on the part of these companies of their contention that the value of their properties for rate-making purposes as of this time is upward of $62,000,000. I wanted to make that clear to the committee, if they did not already understand it-probably they didthat the $50,000,000 in the rate base is for unification purposes only, and because the interests of the company are equally served with a $50,000,000 rate base in a unified property as they are with a $62,000,000 rate base in a multiple property. Therefore, the unification agreement was made up along those lines. The logical, subsequent steps would be, as you already know, if the unification agreement goes into force and effect, that the Public Utilities Commission would proceed to-I say that because obviously that would be their duty-to enter into a study of the rearrangement and the putting into force of the corporate unification and the physical unification, readjustment, and rearrangement of the properties. That would involve a checking by that commission of studies already made by competent engineers and a study by their own engineers, by the machinery that has been provided by law for working out these problems and in due course such plans as they might find feasible, practicable, and useful to the public of the city of Washington would be put into force and effect. It is believed that within 12 months a plan of readjustment and rearrangement can be put into force and effect that will result in economies of $840,000 a year. That is what I meant when I said that Mr. Bibbins' study was of a plan that could be put into effect in the shortest time at the least capital expenditure. It is possible, however, that in collaboration with the Park and Planning Commission, upon whose shoulders rests the future development and beautification of Washington, that the unification-the physical unification might be broadened out much more comprehensively. There are greater economies than that possible in the field of operation, greater usefulness of the facilities now in existence are possible; but the commission will decide ultimately just how far they should go at this time, just what plans they may make that would fit into the future needs of the city; and I should say in the course of a comparatively few months the real benefits of the merger from a service standpoint would begin to be enjoyed by the citizens of Washington. And, after all, that is all there is in the public utility business. The commodity in the public utility business is service. My experience has been, gentlemen of the committee, that a service rendered to the public-a satisfactory and adequate service-has never in the history of the business resulted in a quarrel with the public as to fair pay for that service. The people of Washington have not been overcritical of these properties in their demand for this merger. They have recognized the unusual and extraordinary conditions which exist and which, as I say, will always exist in multiple control within a given area of transportation, and is susceptible to improvement; and I think that the cry of the people of Washington is a very just and very proper cry for service, not price. There is great confusion in discussing price and service. The average man sells the price. The salesman in the store, the overcoat salesman, the greatest difficulty that his teacher has in making the salesman a salesman is to teach him to sell his commodity and not the price. You all know that the average overcoat salesman will present an overcoat to your view and say it is a very beautiful coat. You ask what is the price. He says, "A hundred dollars. But here is one for $75." Now, he is selling the price and not the coat. The public utilities business, gentlemen, is the sale of service, and if a public utility can give a satisfactory and adequate service and keep pace with the growth and development of the community it serves, it has no quarrel and never has had in the history of the business as to a fair return for this service. But when the service slips, then the price comes to the fore in the discussion and in the criticism. Mr. GILBERT. Mr. Chairman, it is a few minutes after 12. Will we go on or adjourn until 2 o'clock? The CHAIRMAN. We might go on until about half-past 12, Judge, if the committee is willing. Mr. GILBERT. The witness is very enlightening. Mr. WILSON. I will conclude my opening statement in just one moment. Mr. GILBERT. All right. I do not want to miss any of his testimony. Mr. WILSON. I will conclude my opening statement in just a few words. |