The Responses

THE PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN WILL NOT FEATURE THESE FACTS

This oil-rubber-bus combine has several clever and subtle ways of imposing extra charges for transportation upon the riding public and the tax-payers alike. Sometimes this is accomplished by simply raising the fare above the level charged by the electric railway. When they can't get away with this method, they will stampede through the necessary legislation permitting them to establish the "zone" system. The passengers then suddenly discover that, upon crossing some imaginary boundary line, they owe the driver of the bus a seoond fare, whioh must be paid upon alighting. Another favorite way devised to charge more for bus transportation than the electric railway charged, is to revoke transfer privileges. Whereas the riding public formerly enjoyed city-wide riding privileges with the payment of one fare (by using a transfer ticket) the bus system operators, sanctioned by the city's political leaders, will either revoke the transfer privileges entirely, or start charging extra money for transfers. Another favorite method of extorting more money from the riding public when buses are substituted for electric railways, is to shorten the routes, or cut a long route into two or more short routes, charging a separate fare for each route and causing the additional inconvenience of changing from one vehicle to another—whereas formerly the passengers enjoyed a through ride at a single fare on the electric railway.

Very likely the electric railway has pleaded for some increase in revenue. but has been denied by political powers who sought favor in the eyes of the voters and tax-payers. If so, you can rest assured that the electric railway more richly deserves the increase in revenue to meet the steadily increasing costs of labor and materials AND TO MEET THE COST OF STREET PAVING WHICH MANY ELECTRIC RAILWAYS HAVE INHERITED FROM THEIR HORSE-CAR PREDECESSORS. Actually, there is no justification in forcing an electric railway system to pave the streets through which it operates, particularly when that pavement is utilized and worn out by their automotive competitors. Yet the political powers in many of our cities continue to enforce the terms of the original horse-car franchises which saddle the electric railways with the expense of providing facilities which are of no use to the rail ways—but which their competitors enjoy without expense. The point is, that if increased revenue is to be permitted at all, IT SHOULD BE GRANTED TO THE ELECTRIC RAILWAY BECAUSE OF ITS LARGE CONTRIBUTION TO THE PUBLIC EXPENSE THROUGH TAXES ON TRACK, POWER PLANT, POWER LINES, CAR BARNS AND OTHER REAL PROPERTY, AND BECAUSE OF ITS LARGE CONTRIBUTION TO THE PUBLIC EXPENSE THROUGH STREET PAVING. However, we find that in the great majority of cases, the electric railway has been repeatedly denied any increase in revenue regardless of these mounting expenses—in spite of its continually expanding service. But as soon as the bus system is established, we find that many or all of these increases in revenue are granted the bus system—regardless of the fact that the bus system makes NO contribution to paving expenses (even for the use of the pavements which the buses actually use) and makes NO contribution to the public expense through taxes on track, power-plant, power-lines, etc.—because the bus system has little or no real taxable property. CASES ARE ON RECORD IN WHICH THE BUS SYSTEM ACTUALLY TORE DOWN THE CAR BARN RATHER THAN PAY TAXES ON THE STRUCTURE, AND LET THEIR BUSES RUST AND ROT OUT ON VACANT LOTS WHEN NOT IN USE. Thus we find the bus system en­joying higher fare rates than were ever permitted the electric railway, while contributing far less to the public expense than did the electric railway—IN SPITE OF THE FANTASTIC CLAIMS OF THE BUS PROMOTERS THAT BUSES ARE MORE ECONOMICAL TO OPERATE THAN ELECTRIC RAILWAYS. Of course these claims are unfounded, for if the bus system were called upon by the city government to contribute as largely to the public expense as did the electric railway, the bus system would have to still further increase its charges to the riding public in order to survive. Its vehicles wear out more quickly and require more frequent complete replacement, and during their limited life they require frequent and expensive repairs far in excess of the maintenance costs for electric railway cars. The inefficient and primitive arrangement of carrying large non-paying loads wherever the bus goes (fuel supply and prime-mover engine) results in increased expense for motive power above that required by the electric railway car, while the passenger capacity of the average bus is considerably smaller than that of the average electric railway car.

Other fantastic and misleading claims to superiority made by the bus promoters deserve careful scrutiny and complete exposure. Some of their favorite claims—presented in clever and convincing manner—comprise half-truths or deliberate misrepresentations.

A man's truthfulness should be measured not so much by the actual words he employs as by the ideas which he deliberately conveys to those he addresses with those words. If he cleverly constructs truthful statements so as to imply untruths, he is guilty of falsehood. If he carefully avoids mentioning important facts which would completely alter the meaning of the partial truths which he states—then he is morally a liar. If Junior runs in the house with a bloody nose and reports that little Bobby next door punched him in the face—he may be telling the absolute truth as far as it goes. But if he deliberately avoids mentioning that he had just previously clouted Bobby over the head with a baseball bat—and that Bobby is at the moment on the way to the hospital in an ambulance—Junior is guilty of misrepresentation.

The publicity releases and the sales arguments circulated widely by the bus promoters are packed with half truths, obviously designed to convey meanings which are false. Many of the statements are completely without foundation. Many are cleverly worded, with the obvious intent to impart false im­pressions. Underlying the whole campaign is the ulterior motive to discredit the electric railways of our nation—to shake the well founded faith of the public, their elected public officials and the officers of transportation utilities, in our established electric railway systems. And this campaign is paying big dividends to those unscrupulous interests which have combined their resources to finance the campaign. Unfortunately the American public is gullible, and seeing something in print frequently enough, they are easily convinced that it is true. They fail to investigate the source—or they fail to consider the source. As a result they are all too often misled by unprincipled persons or groups. By maneuvering with not-too ethical politicians, the bus promoters arrange to obtain valuable concessions for the prospective bus operaters which the electric railways were never able to obtain, and by sacrificing the interests of the riding public and the taxpayers, the business of operating busas is made most attractive to the transit companies. As a result, some of the transit officials are heard joining in the chorus of the song taught them by the bus promoters—"Modernization, Improvement, Progress". The fact that some misled electric railway officials themselves voice sentiments in favor of conversion to bus operation, contributes to the apparent plausibility of the bus promoters' claims.

Some typical examples of misrepresentation on the part of the bus promoters are as follows: (1) "Buses are safer and more convenient for the passengers because they pull over to the curb to discharge and pick up passengers". The statement implies that the electric railway cars cause inconvenience and danger to the passengers by stopping out in the middle of the street to discharge and pick up passengers. If anyone interested will just give this matter a little thought, he will soon realize that THERE IS NO DIFFFERENCE WHATEVER IN THE MEASURE OF SAFETY OR CONVENIENCE. Here is the reason: The bus pulls over to the right hand side of the street, near the curb, and discharges on an average 50% of its alighting passengers on the WRONG SIDE OF THE STREET. It then becomes necessary for those passengers to cross ALL THE WAY over to the opposite side of the street to reach their intended destinations. In like manner, 50% of the prospective passeneers who wish to board the bus, must come from the opposite side of the street, and must cross ALL THE WAY over in order to reach the bus. The electric railway car stops at a well defined safety zone in the middle of the street, where it treats 100% of its passengers impartially, they all cross HALF WAY over the street to reach either curb or to board the car. THE TOTAL RISK AND TOTAL CONVENIANCE IS IDENTICALLY THE SAME. But the bus promoters craftily avoid mentioning this fact. They concentrate on the alleged advantages of curb loading and unloading.

(2) "Buses pullover to the curb when they stop for passengers, thus avoiding any delay to following traffic." Both the first and second part of this statement will not withstand close investigation. In the great majority of cases, parked vehicles along the curb adjacent to the bus-stop make it impossible for the bus to draw up parallel to the curb. As a result, the bus makes a sort of gesture at pulling over towards the curb, stopping at an acute angle with its rear standing out in the first traffic lane. This means that following vehicles are either delayed while the bus stops, or that they swing out into the next outer or opposing lane, causing delay to vehicles in that lane if not actually causing accidents by their suddenly altered course. In contrast, the electric railway car follows the obviously outlined course of its rails causes no more delay to other vehicles when it stops than does the bus, but avoids confusion to traffic by sticking to its predetermined course. The bus does NOT pullover parallel to the curb in the great majority of cases and it DOES delay traffic when it stops. If you have not noticed this performance, check up on it yourself.

Another fact in connection with the "curb stops" of buses, which promoters carefully avoid drawing attention to, is the sacrifice made by those property owners, residents, merchants and others in front of whose property the curb stops are estab­lished. Usually two locations to each block along the route of the bus line (one on each side of the street) must be reserved along the curb for bus stops. Here no parking is permitted. This means that the property at each of these locations is discriminated against. No customers of the merchant at such a lo­cation may park their cars there even long enough to enter and make a purchase. No truck may stop there even long enough to load or unload. The owner of the property can not even park his own car there, but must resort to "poaching" on some neighbor's curb space. The owner or occupant of that property is expected and forced to contribute his curb space to the public convenience and the bus service—WITHOUT RECOURSE, AND WITHOUT COMPENSATION. Such a condition is never caused by the electric railway.

(3) "Buses are not confined to tracks—they may be steered in and out and around to get ahead through traffic". This is a self-condemning statement—for that is EXACTLY the kind of driving that our traffic police are trying their best to prevent. Traffic should keep in orderly lines, and not weave left and right, from one lane to another. That is what causes confusion and overall slowing-up of all traffic. What is worse, it causes serious aocidents. Every time a vehicle in one lane suddenly swerves over into another lane there is risk of one or more accidents. Other vehicles in turn are forced out of their lanes or are forced to suddenly apply their brakes to avoid the intruding vehicle. Traffic policemen issue summonses to such violators of traffic regulations, for jeopardizing the lives of other drivers and passengers. Should the bus driver carry special license to weave in and out and thus "get ahead through traffic" at the risk and delay of other vehicles? Are not the drivers of the other vehicles equally anxious to "get ahead through traffic"? If all vehicles on the street kept in as orderly a line as do the electric railway cars, if their movements were as dependable and predictable as those of the electric railway cars—there would be far fewer traffic delays, and what is more important—far fewer serious accidents.

(4) "Buses have flexible routes, which may be readily changed with changing requirements."

That one LOOKS like an obvious advantage, doesn't it? But is it? Think carefully. Is there a "business district" in your city where, within a few blocks, you can conveniently find everything you want on your shopping tour—where you can pay your bills, or go in and relax over a nice cool drink? And close at hand do you find the choice of several different movie shows? How did the property value increase so remarkably in the last few years? Has that property you bought there twenty years aeo doubled, trippled or quadrupled its value? Have its earnings increased steadily since you bought it? The average American city has grown up around the design of its established transportation system. If the electric railway system was laid out so that its various branches converged upon its growing "business district", then that district's future was assured. It continued to grow and to increase in real property value as well as in convenience value to the whole community. The concentration of patronage brought to it by the various electric railway lines whose cars all converge on "Main street" or whatever its name may be have resulted in continued increase in improvements, prosperity and expension for that "headquarters" district. Without such a permanently located transportation system, you would find a scattering of business establishments, with the result that it would be necessary for you to ride here for your groceries, there for your meats, somewhere else to pay your electric bill, and another trip in some other direction would be required when you want to pay your tax bill. Theatres would be located in helter-skelter fashion, and the telephone company's office might be almost anywhere. Did you buy a home out in a nice suburban section, close to the electric railway line so that you would not have too far to walk in the morning and in the evening, particularly in bad weather? How would you teel if, after getting your home paid for and the garden nicely cultivated—some politically influential person decided to buy some lots several blocks over from the transportation line—and to enhance its value he suddenly had the line rerouted AWAY from your home, but conveniently close to HIS property? You'd be pretty indignant about it, wouldn't you? You might even suggest that it was illegal, discriminatory, un-American.

But that sort of thing is being done every day, with BUS lines. They are routed and rerouted overnight by those who have the strongest political influence. There is NOTHING fixed or permanently established about any bus line. An electric railway line is laid out according to carefully drawn-up plans, to properly serve the most people the most conveniently. Once it is built, the city's pattern for that section is definitely established. You may rely upon the route remaining as it Was built—and you may safely invest your money in the site you have chosen for your home or your business. Before the electric railway can be moved, new plans must be made, engineers must make surveys, contractors must be engaged for the work. Such a move can hardly be sprung as a surprise, or a fait d'accompli. You, as a property owner and tax-payer will have time to submit objection or to demand investigation. As a result such a move is nade only upon the desire and approval of a proper majority. But the bus line? To change its route requires merely a telephone call from an influential person. The very next bus on the schedule may immediately follow the new route. This has been done all over our country. In one city after another buses have become poli­tical footballs. Yes, the bus route IS flexible. Would you care to take a chance on purchasing real estate along the route of a bus, because of the convenience afforded by the bus line? Or have you already had the unfortunate experience of making such an investment, with the usual results? The electric rail way creates stability in property values. One may depend upon a steady increase in popularity and value of the property along its route. But the bus line, remember, is FLEXIBLE.

(5) "The modern bus is smooth-riding. Its soft upholstered seats add to the comfort of travel." Does this statement imply that the electric railway car is hard-riding and that its hard seats detract from the comfort of travel? Used in comparing the alleged advantages of the bus over the electric railway car—it would certainly SEEM so. Let's not compare potatoes with apples. If we are discussing a modern bus, let's discuss a modern electric railway car. Let's not draw an obviously unfair comparison between a 1945 bus and a 1915 electric railway car. However, because of their strong, durable design and construction, there are many 1915 electric railway cars still performine admirably. They provided the extra transportation that was so desperately needed during the recent World War II as well as they did during World War I, and they are not worn out yet. However—they should now be retired and replaced by modern p.c.c. cars. It will not be practical to compare 1915 buses with anything because buses fall apart after a few years of service, so perishable and frail is their construction, and so rugged is their service in bouncing and jolting over rough pavements. If you are impressed by the statement that the modern bus is smooth-riding, and that its soft upholstered seats add to the comfort of riding, just try a few rides in one. Yes the upholstery is soft. But your knees are jammed up against the seat ahead of you, because of the fact that so many seats have been crowded into so little space in the attempt to provide a maximum number of seats. Even so, there are fewer seats in the average bus than in the average electric railway car. And if you have the misfortune to win an aisle seat, you will find that because the bus itself is narrower than the electric railway car, the seats and the aisles are narrower, with the result that half of your posterior hangs suspended in mid-air out in the narrow aisle where passengers squeezing by repeatedly bump and thump your person. Its a little embarrassing at first—but you'll have to get used to it if you ride the bus, just as you'll have to get used to the chafing of your knees against the seat ahead of you. You may find the swerving from left to right and right to left a bit annoying and alarming as the driver weaves in and out and around traffic. If you happen to be numbered amongst the relatively large proportion of passengers who must ride standing up in the bus, you will pro­bably find this weaving around—and the sudden stops and starts, make it difficult to keep your balance. You'd better jolly well hold fast to a stanchion all the time, otherwise you may be pitched headlong on your nose.

HAVE YOU ACTUALLY TRIED IT?

Well, let's assume that you survive the trip without anything worse than a bashed-in hat and trampled toes. Now try a ride in the modern electric railway vehicle—the P.C.C. car. By the way, do you know what those initials stand for? They mean Presidents' Conference Committee. The presidents of the leading electric railways of the United states got together and raised a fund of one million dollars for research work, to produce the ideal design for an ultra-modern electric railway car. The result of this, the greatest industrial research effort ever undertaken, is the P.C.C. car that you are invited to ride in. You will notice not only the soft, comfortable upholstery on the seats, but also the ample room for your knees between the seats, and the ample width of the seats to accommodate two normal passengers. No hanging half of your person out in the aisle in THIS vehicle. And the ample width of the aisle precludes the annoying bumps and thumps from other passengers, because they have plenty of room in which to pass. Notice that smooth but swift start? Other traffic is left far behind as the traffic-light changes to green, for this car has a remarkably quick get-away. Now THAT constitutes really getting ahead—without going THROUGH traffic, without causing any danger or confusion to other vehicles. But any standees in the aisle are not in the least inconvenienced, because the swift start is devoid of jerks.

Here is a smooth, continuous motion, with no shifting of gears, engaging of clutch or "gunning" the engine, as in the bus. Likewise, there is no roar of exhaust, or smell of gas fumes. Here is Silent, smooth, properly controlled electrical energy. Even the familiar wheel-sounds of the railway are absent, for in this modern electric railway car the steel wheel-treads are insulated from the rest of the car by resilient rubber "sandwiches", and the various other parts of the mechanism are rubber-insulated to produce a quiet, well cushioned ride. There is no uncomfortable swerving from left to right or right to left, for we are following the straight steel rails. We are not alarmed about the operator's skill in steering in and out and around obstacles—for he is not required to do any steering at all—that was all done for him by the engineers who surveyed the line and built the track.

ALWAYS PERFECT CONTROL, REGARDLESS OF SLIPPERY SURFACES

Now we are approaching a stopping point—and we marvel at-the remarkably short distance in which this big, roomy car can be checked from its swift flight to a complete standstill—with no jerks or lurches—just a prompt but smooth reduction in speed. And this is done without even resorting to the powerful electro magnetic track brakes. They are reserved for sudden emergencies when some reckless driver, violating regulations, darts into our path. Then these uncanny but sure-footed magnetic devices actually grab the track over which we are skimming. Regardless of oil or sleet or snow, they will bring us to a smooth but even shorter stop than do the regular service brakes. No chance of "sliding wheels" with these magnetic track brakes—they have nothing to do with the wheels. And they can always be relied upon REGARDLESS OF SLIPPERY SURFACE CONDITIONS. That is certainly a comforting thought in this age of faster and faster pace. It is nice to be able to outspeed anything else on the road—but it is more important to be able to stop promptly and RELIABLY.

The brilliant but properly shielded lights in this modern car, and the absence of vibration and '"jiggle" make read­ing a pleasure, for we know that under these conditions we are not injuring our eyes. The odorless electric heat in the winter with proper sanitary ventilation, and the wide open windows in the summer with no smelly exhaust to overheat the car or choke the passengers make riding in this modern vehicle a pleasure ANY time of the year. THIS is the modern electric railway car, which invites comparison with any other form of mass-transportation vehicle—in point of safety, comfort, convenience and economy.

IMPORTANT DATA, - TRY TO MATCH IT!

This modern electric railway cart - known familiarly as the P.C.C. car—has a total horsepower of 220. It smoothly accelerates at the rate of 4 3/4 miles per hour per second. With its service brakes, it decelerates normally at the same rate—4 3/4 miles per hour per second. However, faced by the necessity of making a shorter stop, it ann actually decelerate from a speed of 20 miles per hour at the rate of 9 miles per hour per second. This is made possible by its electro-magnetic track brakes which provide, in addition to the drag of wheel brakes—a braking drag equivalent to 1 1/3 times the weight of the car. The car weighs 33,000 lbs., is 46 ft long, 8 ft. 6 in. wide, and 10 ft. high, insuring plenty of headroom and space for the the passengers to move about within. The car seats 60 passengers and has space for as many as 40 standees without discomfort. This means that, during rush hours when many passengers prefer to ride standing up rather than to wait for seating accommodations, this car will carry 100 passengers with ONE VEHICLE MOVEMENT, ONE OPERATOR. TRY TO MATCH ITS PERFORMANCE WITH ANY OTHER VEHICLE ON WHEELS—OR EVEN NEARLY APPROACH IT!

If THIS type of car is not considered and investigated in any suggested transit "modernization program" or "improvement campaign", there is most certainly good reason to suspect that SOMEBODY is afraid of it—afraid to submit the vehicles THEY advocate to a direct, just comparison with the P.C.C. car.

HAVE THE IMPROVEMENT PROMOTERS OFFERED YOU AN OPPOrtUNITY TO SEE AND RIDE IN THE P.C.C. CAR? HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO INVESTIGATE GENUINE FACTS AND FIGURES IN CONNEctION WITH ITS OPERATION? If NOT, you are missing the greatest possibility for improving your transit systemJ THE BEST INVESTMENT OF ALL.

INSIST UPON A TRIAL OF THE P.C.C. CAR BEFORE PERMITTING A DECISION. IF ANYONE ATTENPTS TO PREVENT THIS TRIAL AND INVESTIGATION, YOU MAY BE SURE THAT HE IS A TRAITOR TO THE PUBLIC CAUSE. HE IS BENT UPON CONCEALING THE BEST AND FORCING YOU TO ACCEPT AN ALTOGETHER INFERIOR SUBSTITUTE.

The P.C.C. cars are built by several different manufacturers—none of whom were even aware that this document was being prepared and distributed.

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP In order to make perfectly clear the identity of the writer, his background and his motives for spreading the acoompanying facts and information before you, the following statement is presented; I, Edwin J. Quinby, am a citizen of the United States of America. I was born in New York City January 13, 1894. I was educated at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York, at New York City College and by the International Correspondence Sohools in electrical Engineering. I have had several years of experience in the field of mass-transportation, having been employed by the North Jersey Rapid Transit Company (Paterson, N.J. and the suburban communities to Suffern, N.Y.) as Conductor and as Motorman on multiple-unit trains in Interurban service, as Mechanic-Electrician on maintenance work in the shops and out on the line and as Sub-station Operator. I have had experience with the American Car & Foundry Company as Car DeSigner and as Car Inspector. I have been employed by the Western electric Company and by the Radio Corporation of Amerioa, whose laboratories I left in May 1941 when called to active duty in the United States Naval Reserve, of which I have been a member since 1932.

Nine United States Patents have been issued to me on electrical devices in the field of railway Signals, sound and radio, none of which I now own and in which I own no royalty interest. I have no securities in any manufacturing companies, publicity organizations, public service companies or utilities with the exception of the American Telephone & Telegraph Company. I have been president of the electric Railroaders' Association for the past five years. I am at present on active duty in the Navy with the rank of Commander. I have nothing to sell and I have no ulterior motive in bringing the aocompanying information to your attention. I am motivated by the earnest desire to see certain valuable public utilities which I know to be in jeopardy receive proper justice and survive so that the American public may continue to enjoy the superior facilities whioh only these utilities are capable of providing and so that our natural resources may be conserved for the important peacetime applications and the vital national defense applioations in which they are indispensable. While I am convinced that the electric Railroaders' Association of 51 West 35th Street, New York City 1, is in full accord with my disclosures, I take full personal responsibility for all of the statements in this document which I am having reproduced and distributed at my own expense.