1914-12-26aass

“Controller Gardner, who has taken up the cause of the east end people who have been complaining about the car service in that section, produced statistics this morning to show that he had dealt promptly with the matter”

          Hamilton Spectator. December 27, 1914.

          In 1914, complaints piled up constantly regarding the service provided by the Hamilton Street Railway, particularly between the downtown core and the far east of the complaint.

          Early in December, 1914, the Hamilton Board of Control addressed the rising number of complaints by giving Controller Gardner the task of investigating the matter.

Controller Gardner, a mayoral candidate in the municipal election to be held at the end of the month, appeared to be spending more attention on his campaign than on his current duties.

 

 

Several weeks passed before Gardner made any report to the Board of Control about what he had learned about the street car service, and he was receiving heavy criticism for his inattention to the matter.

Finally, after Christmas, Gardner contacted the Hamilton Spectator to present some statistics on the street car service, statistics the controller had amassed:

“On Wednesday, Dec. 16, he stood at the corner of King and John streets and, for one hour personally checked every car that passed between the hour of five o’clock and 6:10 p.m. This is supposed to be one of the busiest periods of the day.”¹

¹ “What One Hour Check of East Cars Showed : Controller Gardner Kept Tab Himself : Finds Service Averages About Four Minutes : Presents Figures in Reply to His Critics”

Hamilton Spectator.  December 27, 1914

 

Hamilton Mayor Allan had been asked by Controller Morris, at a recent Board of Control meeting, whether anything had been reported about Controller Gardner’s assignment regarding Hamilton Street Railway service. As Gardner was not in attendance, the mayor said that he had not but would follow up on the question.

When Gardner heard about the criticism he was receiving, he did not immediately reply to the mayor or the Board of Control, but went to the Hamilton Spectator, the newspaper which incidentally was supporting his candidacy in the upcoming election:

“The controller explained today that he had no desire to carry on a controversy through the newspapers in regard to the matter. What he is interested in is seeing that the citizens get the best possible service.

“His only object in making public the figures is to reply to a member of the board of control, who, in his absence the other day, tried to make it appear that he had done practically nothing, although it was left to him to try and get the service improved.”¹

The Hamilton Herald, which perhaps not coincidentally was supporting Controller Gardner’s main opponent in the mayoralty race, was quick to criticize the release of the figures to the Spectator, and not to the other two Hamilton daily newspapers, or to the Board of Control itself.

The Herald also challenged Gardner’s assertion that the Hamilton Street Railway was actually better than was required on an agreement between the company and the city :

“Those people who have been complaining about the poor street railway service will be surprised to know that they are getting far better service than they should receive, according to the published statement of Controller Gardner.

“He was appointed several weeks ago to look into the matter, and while he has not reported to the board of control, he reported a schedule of figures which shows that instead of the railway giving poor service, it really excelled itself and almost gave twice as good a service as is required.”²

² “Street Railway Has Champion : Controller Gardner Says Service is Better Than City Demands : He Made Discovery on Dec. 16 But Has Not Reported to Board”

Hamilton Herald. December 28, 1914.

Controller Morris, contacted by the Herald, said the following in response to Gardner’s self-gathered statistics and conclusion as to the quality of the street car service provided :

“ ‘If Controller Gardner says that he got his figures from personally watching the cars, I have no real reason to doubt his word. If he got them on December 16, he should have presented them to the Board of Control. There have been three meetings since that time, but we have not heard of the report. Perhaps he will report it tomorrow, and then we can discuss it.’ ”²

The Herald stated that there was not a little unbelief regarding Gardner’s contention that Hamilton Street Railway Company service was not only excellent, but exceeded the requirements of its agreement with the city:

“ ‘He seems to favor the spectacular methods rather than doing business in a business-like way,’ said one well-known businessman who hardly thinks the street railway service the best in the world.”²

The Herald reporter, also reacting to Gardner’s support of the Hamilton Street Railway, had the following to say:

“To date Controller Gardner is about the man in the hundred thousand odd persons in this city who has discovered that the company is giving such an excellence service.

“Everybody else in the city is complaining that the service is bad, very bad. The principal complaint is that the schedule is not maintained. An official of the company admitted last week that the company found it impossible to run the cars according to schedule.

“But Controller Gardner says the cars are running ahead of schedule. He produced his little tabular record to prove how well the company is serving the public.

“Everybody in Hamilton who uses the street cars has complained that they are overcrowded at rush hours. This is the result of the schedule being shattered.

“But Controller Gardner says the cars are away ahead of schedule and his tabular report is produced as evidence.

“But in spite of this evidence, the complaints continue to be made by nearly every person else in Hamilton’s population who uses the cars.”²

With the mayoral election just days away, Controller and Candidate Gardner’s support of the Hamilton Street Railway was ill-timed to say the least. As he based his support from the results of his own recording of street cars passing him as he stood at King and John streets, his credibility was damaged.

When Gardner finally presented his statistics to a Board of Control meeting, he tried to dodge the torrent of criticism he had been receiving. He admitted that he had only been counting cars, and not noting how crowded they were.

The controller agreed that the overcrowding was not acceptable:

“ ‘ We are not getting the service, we should get. I think the incoming council should appeal to the railway board for better service.”³

³ “Gardner Would Appeal to the Railway Board : Not Satisfied With Street Railway Service”

          Hamilton Spectator. December 30, 1914.

Gardner then moved a resolution that the matter of poor street railway service be deferred to the new council about to the elected. His motion passed.

A local lawyer, present at the meeting, loudly objected to the deferral. After loudly reading his own resolution asking for better street car service, the mayor told him that the lawyer could not move any such thing as he was not even an elected official.

The lawyer hotly replied that he had no intention to wait for the new council and would lodge a group complaint about the inferior service directly to the Hamilton Street Railway company himself immediately.

“ “All right, do as you please,’ the mayor said.”³

Mayoral candidate Gardner’s backtracking on his claim the street car service in Hamilton was excellent did not help his campaign. He was soundly defeated by Chester Walters who would formally became Hamilton’s mayor early in January 1915.