STREET RAILWAYS

transportation by means of tracks on the city streets; otherwise (in Great Britain and other English speaking countries) tramways. Electricity is generally the motive power, the current coming either from overhead by means of a wire and trolley or from underground through a conduit between the rails. The first street railway in the world was laid down in New York City in 1831 between the Bowery and Union Square. The cars were drawn by two horses and modeled after the stage coaches of the time. A rapid extension of the system followed as cities in different parts of — the country increased in size. Horse-car transit remained the chief vehicular convenience in cities till about 1880. By that time steam cars, or steam motors with attached cars, had been tried in New York and Phila delphia and other cities. Steam operation was not a succe on city streets, though it lingered in New York till 1903. Further experiments to improve on horse-driven transport became directed to the cable car, operated by a continuous cable extending underground and motivated by a stationary engine. The cable system had been introduced in New York, San Francisco, Chicago and other large American cities, as well in Great Britain (where tramways were established in 1860), but it was too costly and infiexible, and was finally abandoned except for local steep grade traffic, as on hilly roads in San Francisco and Seatile, and High gate Hill, London. The electric car ousted the horse vehicle after numerous experiments to adopt the dynamo and motor to street traction purposes. The first street track laid with an underground circuit between the rails to supply current for moving the cars was operated in Cleveland in 1884. The overhead or trolley system first came into practical use in Kansas City, Mo., in the same year. Other pioneering electric street-lines displacing horses were built in Baltimore in 1885 and in Richmond, Va., in 1888. In Baltimore both a third rail and 38 overhead trolley were installed. n Richmond, the current was supplied from overhead. It was the succe of the Richmond system which extended for eleven miles, that set the pace for the displacing of horse-driven cars by electric traction throughout the country. A decade later electric street transit systems were operating in amost 150 cities, the energy coming from a central generating station and carried to the ears by an overhead copper wire. Storage battery cars were frequently used, especially on light traffic lines. The adoption of the complete circuit system in the United States dates from 1895 and 1896 when the first were installed at Washington, D. C., and New York, though the conduit method had been in use in a number of European cities before that year. Alternating current became the practice when the power house had to supply energy for long distances, as on interurban lines. The companies operating street car lines are regulated and in some cases owned by the municipality, which granted franchises, formerly in perpetuity, but now only for defined periods. See URBAN TRANSPORTATION. The conduct of urban and interurban transportation became a bone of contention between the companies and the civic authorities, due to complications arising from monopolistic control and municipal regulation, public demands for better service, agitation for reduced fares or against proposed increased, financial straits of many companies, propaganda for municipal ownership and operation, and periodical labor troubles. Street traction figured prominently in municipal politics in every city that boasted a car line, so intimately is it bound with the daily life of a community. Frequently, in the face of mounting overhead charges, companies could not charge more than the traditional fare of five cents, which did not meet outlays, and consequently many systems operated at a lo . Local authorities, in refusing the companies’ pleas to raise their fares in order to pay dividends, charged them with inefficiency. The municipal viewpoint was that street car lines were overcapitalized and inefficiently conducted, and if they were operated at a lo , dividends should be paid out of surplus. The situation after the World War led to many street railway systems being forced into receiverships, the disruption of others, defective service, and inability to replace run-down equipment, no funds being available to buy new cars. In January, 1920, it was stated that only two of the large cities were at peace over local traction. These cities were Cleveland and Oincinnati, which had composed their differences by an agreement with the traction interests for service at cost. Other cities arrived at a similar settlement. The service-at-cost method, known as the Taylor plan, was credited with producing good service, adequate betterments and extensions as required, and low fares (or as low as practicable) based on service and six per cent. income on the actual investment. It was described as private ownership under public control. The need of some such adjustment was manifest from testimony tendered before the Federal Electric Railways Commi ion, appointed by President Wilson in 1919 to investigate the whole situation. The commi ion reported that the electric railway industry was without financial credit and was improperly perfurming its public function. The industry’s volume may be judged from census figures covering 1917, in which year street and interurban railways carried more than 11,000,000,000 fare-paying pa engers, more than 3,000,- 000,000 transfer and some 181,000,000 free pa engers, or a total traffic exceeding 14,500,000,000. The number of fare paying pa engers represented an average of about 100 trips for every man, woman and child in the country. The cars operated numbered 102,602 on 44,812 miles of track, 294,826 persons were employed, the total revenue obtained amounted to $730,108,040, the operating expenses $452,594,654, taxes, interest and fixed charges $221,- 062,456, and the net inccme $56,450,930. Of 927 operating companies, 300 paid industry in 1920 was capitalized at about $6,000,000,000. The federal investigation produced evidence of an expansion in the price of materials of more than 100 per cent. since 1916, and of about 120% increase in wages, while investors were shown to lack confidence in electric railways and about $7,000,000,000 annually was needed for extensions and improvements. The remedy appeared to lie in a re-establishment of credit by a legal a urance of the integrity of an investment in a local traction project and of a fair return thereon, accompanied by a favorable public attitude towards the enterprise. In 1919 forty-eight companies were in receivers’ hands, but since then a number were reorganized and pa ed out of receivership. In 1922, when the pa engers carried exceeded 15,000,000,- 000, fares ranged from 5 to 10 cents in 607 leading cities. The 7-cent fare was operative in the largest single number of cities, namely, 184; the 10cent came second in 144; and the 6-cent fare third in 102 cities. In 79 cities the fare was 8 cents. Popularity of omnibuses affected street railway traffic in a number of cities, and in some cases the traction companies met or forestalled such competition by themselves installing buses. At the root of the troubles of the street traction systems may be traced a fallacious belief in the industry’s stability. This error, combined with the natural handicap existing in a street railway’s mode of operation, such as rigidity of rail service, which impeded change in routes or location; inflexibility of equipment; greater danger to pa engers, due to increasing traffic, in boarding and alighting from track tied cars; and enforced economies, acting as irritants, such as increased fares and restricted transfers, at last aided the public’s inclination to favor more flexible service offered by bus transportation.