« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
mileage connecting distant portions of the country by their systems will show the greatest average distance for each passenger carried.
In consolidated table G will be found interesting data on this subject. Some of the smaller roads, or those whose mileage is small will show a small average in the distance each passenger is carried. For instance, on the Brownstone and Middletown the average distance is 2 miles; on the Bangor and Portland 7 miles; on the Corn. wall and Lebanon 11 miles; on the Ligonier Valley 7 miles; on the Middletown and Hummelstown 5 miles; on the Mt. Jewett, Kinzua and Riterville 7 miles, while the New York, Chicago and St. Louis, a road paralleling the New York Central and Hudson River and the Lake Shore and Michigan Southern, practically owned by the Vanderbilt systems of railroads, shows the greatest average distance per passenger carried, 98 miles.
Passenger Revenue. Referring to the classification showing the operations of the ten leading railroads, it is found that the passenger revenue of the Bal. timore and Ohio is about 131 millions of dollars; of the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western, 57 millions of dollars; of the Erie, 8 millions; of the Lake Shore and Michigan Southern, 8 millions; of the Lehigh Valley, 4 millions; of the New York Central and Hudson River, 264 millions; of the Pennsylvania, 28 millions; of the Pennsylvania Company, 64 millions; of the Philadelphia and Reading 67 millions, and of the Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis 64 millions.
The total passenger revenue of all railroads reporting to this office is $139,647,284. In 1901 the total was $97,000,000; in 1902 it was $113,000,000; in 1903, $120,000,000; in 1904, $124,000,000; in 1905, $128,000,000. These figures denote a substantial increase in the passenger earnings of the railroads whose reports are filed in this office. No new lines of any moment are included in the data compiled and the figures indicate the actual increase of passenger earnings on the railroads whose reports were filed five years ago, from 97 millions of dollars then to 1394 millions of dollars for the year covered by this report.
Average Amount Received from Each Passenger. From the total passenger revenue, and taking also into consideration the number of passengers carried, it is easy to determine the average amount received from each passenger. Here are found disparities which compare somewhat with the disparities which exist in the column showing the average distance passengers are carried. On the Baltimore and Ohio the average amount received from each passenger is 84 cents; on the Delaware, Lackawanna and Westeru, 28 cents; on the Erie, 36 cents; on the Lake Shore and Michigan Southern, $1.09; on the Lehigh Valley, 79 cents; on the New York Central and Hudson River, 57 cents; on the Pennsylvania, 48 cents; on the Pennsylvania Company, 56 cents; on the Philadelphia and Reading, 20 cents; on the Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis, 62 cents, the average amount received per passenger by these ten companies being the highest on the Lake Shore and Michigan Southern.
A GLANCE AT THE AVERAGE RECEIPTS PER PASSENGER PER MILE AND THEIR RELATION TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A MAXIMUM RATE OF TWO CENTS PER MILE FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF PASSENGERS.
From the single mileage basis denoting the number of passengers carried one mile, together with the total amount of passenger revenue, may be ascertained the average receipts per passenger per mile.
By making the computation as above indicated, it is found that the average receipts per passenger per mile on the roads reporting to this office for the year covered by this report are 1.84 cents. Six years ago the average receipts per passenger per mile were 1.852 cents; in 1902, 1.823 cents; in 1903, 1.861 cents; in 1904, 1.847 cents and in 1905, 1.88 cents.
From these figrres it would seem that there has been a decrease in six years in the average amount received per passenger per mile of .012 of a cent, but when comparison is made with the year ending June 30, 1905, it is found that there is a decrease of .040 of a cent.
No data at hand enable us to satisfactorily account for the ap. parent falling off in a single year of .040 of a cent per passenger per mile in the passenger revenue. It is certainly not due to a reduction of the rate from three cents to two and one-half cents per mile, or to the change which has come in the regulation of the use of the mileage books, for those changes did not occur until after the 30th of June and in a period not covered by this report. The change of .040 of a cent per passenger per mile involves a very large amount of money in the revenue of transportation companies, at least those whose passenger traffic is sufficiently large to be counted by the millions.
It can be seen that in years in which there are large assemblages of people under society organizations in different parts of the country, during which low rate tickets are sold, or in years in which there are political campaigns, both National and State, involving the selling of a great number of excursion tickets, these things would
probably materially affect the rate per passenger per mile. So far as can be determined from the reports of the railroad companies on this subject, it is only conjecture for us to assign any reason for the discrepancies of a glaring character which seem to exist in the average receipts per passenger per mile.
It is important that the data disclosed by these figures as to the average receipts per passenger per mile should be reliable, as there appears to be a strong disposition shown on the part of the commercial bodies of Pennsylvania, and indeed, backed by a strong sentiment of the people, favoring the establishment of a flat rate of two cents per mile for the transportation of passengers in Pennsyl. vania, without reference to the distance such passengers are carried. The reports from which these figures are computed are veritied by the oaths of the officers of each corporation, who should have thorough knowledge of the subject certified to as representing the facts in the premises.
When the Legislature shall assemble and shall be confronted with the responsibility of passing upon legislation on this subject, the knowledge of the amount now received per passenger per mile will be of the utmost importance to each Senator or Representative upon whom the responsibility may rest of establishing a maximum rate per passenger of two cents per mile.
Take therefore the ten leading railroad companies. The receipts per passenger per mile of the Baltimore and Ohio are practically :) cents; of the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western, 1.435 cents; of the Erie, 1.484 cents; of the Lake Shore and Michigan Southern, 2.018 cents; of the Lehigh Valley, 1.747 cents; of the New York Central and Hudson River, 1.747 cents; of the Pennsylvania, 2.027 cents; of the Pennsylvania Company, 2.006 cents; of the Philadelphia and Reading, 1.597 cents, and of the Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis, 1.997 cents.
The average receipts per passenger per mile on these ten leading railroads practically control the average receipts per passenger per mile of all railroads, as their passenger traffic constitutes so large a percentage of all the passenger traffic of all the roads reporting to this office.
The table affixed is self explanatory, but is susceptible of the deepest study. For instance, the Pennsylvania Railroad Company has received per passenger per mile for the year ending June 30, 190.), an average of 2 cents. That average has now advanced .027 of a cent per passenger per mile, and when there is taken into consideration the fact that the Pennsylvania Railroad Company carried 1,389,897,107 passengers one mile, it will be seen that the infinitesimally small fraction of .027 of a cent per passenger per mile produces au
increase of $375,272, hence it is that the change produced by a small fraction in the average receipts per passenger per mile is sufficient to make millions in general results.
TABLE SHOWING THE "AVERAGE RECEIPTS PER PASSENGER PER MILE" FOR THE YEARS 1902, 1903, 1904, 1905 AND 1906 ON THE RAILWAYS MENTIONED.
In considering the average receipts per passenger per mile coupled with the fact that legislation is to be had to make a uniform rate of two cents, it must also be remembered that there are a large number of companies that are to-day receiving more than an average of two cents per passenger per mile, while there are a large number of companies also, whose average receipts per passenger per mile are less than two cents.
Whether the Legislature in its wisdom shall require railroads to charge maximum rates of not exceeding two cents per passenger per mile, or whether it shall provide that uniform rates of two cents per mile shall be charged, has not yet been developed. It is certain, however, that the establishment of a maximum rate of two cents per passenger per mile will deprive some companies of no inconsider. able amount of their passenger revenue.
In studying the computations made on this subject it is found that the average receipts per passenger per mile of a number of companies is far beyond 2 cents, but these are usually the smaller companies. For instance, the Rupert and Bloomsburg road has an average receipt per passenger per mile of over 3 cents; the Sheffield and Tionesta, 41 cents; the Susquehanna and the Bloomsburg and Berwick both 3 cents, and the Tionesta Valley nearly 5 cents.
The data given under the caption of average receipts per passenger per mile are undoubtedly reliable, but must not be construed as meaning more than they purport to mean. If, for instance, the Pennsylvania Railroad shows an average receipt per passenger per mile of 2.027 cents, it does not mean that that is what the company charges passengers per mile for tickets, neither does it mean that
this company does not, in a large number of cases, charge very much in excess of what it has received as an average of 2 cents and a fraction per mile. It means that in calculating the amount of money received as a passenger revenue, based on the number of passengers carried one mile, the average receipt per passenger per mile has been 2.027 cents.
At first thought it might seem that a company, such as the Erie, that received last year an average of 1.484 cents per passenger per mile, would not be affected by the establishment of a maximum rate at 2 cents per mile. This, however, is not a fact for this reason, the Erie Railroad Company in many instances and through no small amount of its territory, charges 3 cents a mile for the transportation of passengers, but notwithstanding the fact that it receives 3 cents a mile for a portion of its passenger traffic, yet for no small portion of its passenger traffic, it receives a very much less amount than 3 cents per mile, and no doubt there is a small fraction at least of its passenger traffic for which it receives not more than 1 cent per mile. All these conditions placed together,—the total amount of passenger revenue and the total number of passengers carried one mile,produce the average as above indicated of 1.484 cents received per passenger per mile. It follows, therefore, that if the Erie Railroad were limited in the maximum rate to not more than 2 cents per mile, the average receipts per passenger per mile would be materially reduced, the amount of such reduction depending upon the portion of its passenger traffic on which it charges a rate beyond 2 cents per mile.
So with other companies, and there are many, indeed most of the trunk lines, whose average receipts per passenger per mile are less than 2 cents. All companies would be affected by the establishment of a maximum rate of 2 cents per mile. The percentage of change, however, would probably be greatest upon those roads who have received per passenger per mile an average above 2 cents.
Another feature to be considered in the establishment of a maximum or uniform rate of 2 cents for passenger traffic is of much importance to the stockholders of some railroads. It is claimed by the accounting departments of some of these transportation companies that they annually sustain a loss in the conduct of their passenger traffic, even at the rates now prevailing and which have been established and controlled by the railroad managers themselves. In considering this feature of the case, it must be borne in mind that there may not be exact uniformity among all railway accounting officers in the assignment of expense. If all such assignments were made on a uniform basis, such as is contemplated on the blank forms of reports, the data resulting from computations ought to be fairly