CROWDING ON TRAMS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1191, 28 July 1911, Page 5

CROWDING ON TRAMS.

AN AMERICAN EXPERIMENT. LIMITATION > RULE 'ABANDONED. In viciv of the controversy upon the subjectof tramway overcrowding, interest attaches to an experiment recently conducted Jn Albany, New York, n. i '.' Electrio Railway Journal" reports that after an experiment of over nine months, tho New York Public Service (..ommission, Second District, .has rescinded lis rule requiring the United Traction Company of Albany to limit the number of passengers carried on each car 011 the le* m s , IM ' ■ ril£ ' withdrawal of .the rule-followed .a public hearing in Janu- ?' ry . - s .' . Thc ! history of (he experiment, in brief, is that on March 30, 1909, tho commission ordered the company to limit tho number of passengers carried on its line to 40 in the case of cars with a seating oajucity for 20, and to 35 in cars with a seating capacity for 21. Public dissatislaction with the service under the new rule, according to the journal, developed rapidly, although at first interest on the experiment was widespread. Letters of inquiry concerning tho experiment were addressed by the secretary of tho District, hallway Commission, Washington, 111 July, 1909, . to tho manager of the train way company concerned and to the chairman of the commission that made the order Ihe manager stated, in liis reply, that the observations of the company upon the new service were not favourable. It meant that the ends of the lines were properly accommodated, while the intermediate parts were not. This to a very largo extent stopped short Tiding, which was really the only profit•ablo riding to street railways. It seemed almost impossible to. stoD overcrowding during rush hours. If the companies could pay additional interest on tho additional equipment necessary to copo with rush hour traffic it would still be impossible to obtain men to work for two or three hours a day: 4 -The cnairman •of the commission stated in his reply that in all fairness it must be. said thai there was a difference of opinion -as to the successful operation of the limitation i rule, although tho commission felt that up to that time (from April to July) it had-worked reasonably we'll. J Eventnally, however, the commission revoked the rule after a public hearin* on .Tamury 12, 1909. at which various citizens tcstJhM that they had been compelled to stand on street corners, in inclement weather, for lengthy periods, whilo car after oar passed, having available standing space which they could have'occupied had it not been for the limitation rule. Tho chairman of the commission, in announcing that the rule would be revoked, said it was obvious that it had failed to work out a solution of tho problem of overcrowding.