[PRCo] Foray to Archives Tower

[Fred W. Schneider III]

This note is primarily to Ed Lybarger and he understands the
conversation ... I'm simply revisiting a subject he and I have discussed
before.  For the rest of you, the Archives Tower in Harrisburg is where
tons of old paper are stored.  In this case, we're talking about data in
the Department of Internal Affairs annual reports from traction
companies.  The problem centers around how could a system with 164 route
miles make money hauling only 34,000 passengers a day when West Penn
peaked at almost six times that number and it too had trouble making
money.  Both systems had roughly equivalent mileage.  The rest of you
might like to jump in with your analytical thoughts ... maybe someone
out there will think of something I've missed. 

And Ed ... the 1898 and 1918 data was exhumed today.   

Right or wrong, the numbers are consistent.  

In 1898 Pennsylvania Traction moved 2,682,996 people to produce
operating income of $192,653.09 resulting in revenue per passenger of
slightly more than 7 cents.  This was a much smaller system ... only 63
miles compared to 164 at its peak.  County population was about 150,000
but the trolleys serve only about 60,000 or so people.

In 1908 the company reported the following data to the U. S. Census of
Electric Railways for the previous calendar year: 9,571,228 annual
pasengers riding over 144 miles of track.  They surpressed the revenue
data for individual companies from public scrutiny.  But there is enough
data to show that the company was consistent in what they reported to
the state and federal governments.   

In 1918 Conestoga Traction transported 13,721,254 total passengers or
12,449,747 fare paying passengers.  They generated revenue passenger
revenue of $1,110,060.898 and operating revenues of $1,217,114.59. 
Revenue per passenger was 8.8 cents ... this makes sense because there
were a lot more suburban lines.  This also equates to about 8.5
passengers per scheduled revenue trip ... maybe the actual number is
lower than that because there were a lot of rush hour trips that were
not in the public timetables and there were also numerous park extras in
the summer and chartered movements.  County population was about
170,000. You might be interested to know that they took in $33,000 from
their ownership of local turnpikes but this is small potatoes. 

All of the Lancaster numbers are under 13 million people per year.  And
in every year examined, average revenue per passenger stays in the 7 to
9 cent range.  By the mid 1920s, the total had dropped to around 9
million people or fewer than 6 people per car dispatched.     

The number of people per car dispatched is a rough approximation based
on a count I once made of trips per hour leaving downtown.  I've doubled
that because there is one more trip each time a car returns.

There is no evidence that data for underlying companies was omitted. 
The company used the proper forms in each year for the non-operating
underlyers and omitted passenger counts.  The income for all the
underlyers was simply rental payments from Conestoga Traction Company.   

As an aside ... today's Red Rose Transit Authority moves fewer than 1
million people per year in a county with nearly a half million people,
and except for a small group of routes connecting the city with the
mall, many coaches seldom have more than 2 to 6 people in them.  Many of
the city and suburban routes have been merged.  Some of the trolley
routes that ran every 6 minutes simply don't even exist today.   

Are we witness to the fact that people didn't go anywhere in the first
half of the century?  Did they simply live in their little towns and
villages from birth until death, shopping there, worshiping there, being
entertained there, and ultimately using the services of the village
undertaker?  Did Conestoga have a better grasp on how many people they
moved than did West Penn?  (In a conversation the other day, EHL
remarked that West Penn moved about 70 million people at its peak.)  Was
it actually possible to make money running partly empty cars when we
only paid motormen $1.60 for a ten to twelve hour day without any fringe
benefits?  I'm really not having a problem with places like Altoona,
Scranton, and Wilkes-Barre generating four times the passenges per track
mile than Lancaster because these places had much longer corridors
within the city than Lancaster did ... distances that people would not
walk.  About 2/3s of the potential patrons in Lancaster City lived
within 2,500 feet of the center of the city, which is close enough for
many people to walk downtown and use the trolleys only to tote their
packages home.  

And there ain't nobody left locally to ask!