The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-08-29
MUST ASK FOR TRANSFERS
Important Court Ruling for
Ocean Beach Pas
SengerS.
SUIT OF FRITHJoF BRONSON.
Result of an Autocratlc Rule Laid
Down by the Market-Street
Railway Company.

A case OF great interest to streetcar
passengers to the Cliff House was decided
by Justice OF the Peace Carroll yesterday.
One day last March Mary L. Keller rode
IN from the ocean beach on the regular
steamcar line to Hsight and Stanyan
streets. On the way she handed the con-
ductor ten cents, from which to deduct her
fare. Before he handed her the change he
was called to one end of the car. On re-
turning he handed her the nickel change,
but no transfer to the cable-car at the end
of the line.
When the cars stopped at Stanyan street
Mrs. Keller hunted up the conductor and
demanded her transfer He refused to
give her one on the ground that he did
not know positively that she had paid a
fare on his train. OF course Mrs. Keller
had TO pay another fare when she boarded
the cable-ear for home She sued the
Market-street Railway Company for 1893
damages. Lots of people have been caught
IN her TX, so the outcome viii interest
them.
The case in court hinged on an old rule
OF the company which obiiges q passenger
to ask for a transfer when he paws his fare.
II the passenger neglects to do this the
passenger must suffer the consequence and
pay the extra nickel according to the law as
laid down by the autoIratic company.
Why passengers should be obliged 10
knuckle down 10 this castiron mandate Of
the corporation did not crop out in the
hearing yesterday.
Mrs Keller testified that she was in the
habit of riding to the ocean beach three or
four times a week. She was thoroughly
familiar with the rule laid down by the
company. But when the conductor
stepped back before giving me my change
the matter OF the transfer slipped my
mind, she explained. Later on | thought
of it aud believed if l got it at the end of
the run it would be all right. It never
crossed my mind that the conductor could
dispute for a moment that l was pas
senger on his train. When | asked him
for transfer at the depot | was dunn
founded at his saying, How do know you
rode on this train?'"
The conductor admitted that he had re-
fused 10 give Mrs. Keller transfer, and
declared he had ac-ed property, as she
had refused TO ask for II when she paid
her fare. He said there were a lot OF
people standing around the depot. and he
had no certain means of knowing that she
had paid her fare on his train. Anybody,
he claimed, could have come out of the
crowd and told the same story and asked
for 5 transfer.
justice OF the f6dCG AdIIOH QeClQcQ
that Mrs. Keller should have asked for her
transfer before the train reached the end
OF its run. In presenting her case her
lawyer failed to show that she had been
forced to pay an extra nickel on the cable
car. Had he done so the court would
have awarded her the return of the nickel.
This would have carried costs and made
big difference 10 Mrs. Keller. It is not
likely that the case will be appealed, so
the question has not vet been finally tested.
The action of another conductor IN the
employ of the Market-street Railway Com
pany has led 10 suit for damages IN the
Justices Court.
Frithjof Bronson, q collector, accompa-
MED by his family, was riding on one of
the cars on Howard street, and be-
cause he did not have any change less than
a s. piece with winch TO pay his fare
he had TO submit re- abuse from the
conductor, SO he says. Not only did he have
to submit to the alleged insulting Ian
guage before carload Of passengers, but
the conductor pecketed his gold piece,
with the remark that he'd make him travel
down to the Office OF the company next
day and get change enough if he wanted
it. Bronson had his wife and infant with
him, so he could not treat the fellow as he
deserved. He took his number and COM
planned 10 the company. Yesterday,
through Attorney Clement, he filed suit
against the company asking for 1893
damages.
On account of the treatment and the in
sulting language Bronson has asked for
$299 damages. He affirms he will push the
case to a conclusion to see If the railway
company cannot be made to paw