The morning times., 1896-05-23
THROUGH FOR ONE fare
Why Capital Traction Company
Should GIVE Two Transfers.
CITIZENS RIGHTS DEFINED
Attorney Thomas Passes Upon the
Right of the Company to Refuse to
Carry Passengers to Destination
Over It's sOwn nLines-Property Titles
ON Water Street.

Attorney S. T. Thomas. counsellor for
the District, is of the opinion that the
Commissioners have nothing to do with
enforcing the term S of the act or Congress
affecting the system OF free transfers
required OF the Rock Greek Railway in
its original maintenance OF an independent
line, but shows that under the terms of
that act any citizen may go into court
and test the right of the company and
the Capital Traction Company, the two
being now consolidated, To refuse trans-
fer as the law provides.
Messrs. w. s. Detweiler and w. F. Sny-
der, residents of Mount Pleasant, each
wrote the commissioners lately inquirlnS
as to the right OF the Capital Traction
Company to refuse transfers, first TO the
u street line, then to Fourteenth street, for
a continuous ride to Mount Pleasant. The
market people have TO pay two fares each
way when going to or returning from o
street market, unless they walk from
street to U street.
Mr.. Thomas cites that by the act Of
March l, 1895, Congress authorized the
Rock Greek Railway Company to contract
with any other street railway company
for the joint management anda operation
of it's lines, or for the purchase OF con-
Meeting or intersecting lines, but the pro-
vision was added that only one fare, not
exceeding existing rates, shall be charged
for single continuous ride over ''all the
lines affected by such contract.
UNDER oE SYSTEM.
The Rock Greek road was consolidated
with the Washington and Georgetown sys-
"a known uDler the
name OF the Capital Traction Company, and
this, Mr.. Thomas says, results in placing
the Seventh, Fourteenth and U street lines
under one management, and entities the
holder of ticket to a continuous ride from
the market to Mount Pleasant.
The statute doe S not provide for trans
fer upon Il transfer, but it is inferred that
this is held by Mr.. Thomas to be a matter
immaterial TO the issue aud OF concern to
40 one but the company.
That orga uiZation will have To adopt its
own measures of protection against i'm
position, and any person aggrieved by the
refusal of a transfer under the circum-
stances narrated has a remedy in u civil
action for damages.
The Commissioners indorse the attorneys
opinion.
Ii has been ordered by the District COm.
missioners that here after permits for the
erection of buildings On the south side of
Water street shall not be issued by the
building inspector. for the reason that tile
land on the river front south of Long Bridge
belongs TO the United States
MATTER OF DISPUTE.
This order is a departure from the rule
observed to date, aud was caused by
dispute over title between the Independent
Ice Company and the James l.. Barbour
estate.
MeSSrs. Garter & Clarke, who are ten
ants of the estate, made application for
the erection of a stable near the Ice com
pany's property, but Eefore its issue the
condition was imposed that they either
obtain the consent of the company or
locate the stable at some poiut a sufficient
distance away, where il would not en-
counter objections. This consent could not
be obtained, and Inspector Brady was
served with notice of objections by Presi-
dent c. B. Church of the ice company, il.
which he was also formed that the ground
south of the dock is the property of the
company and not Of the estate.
In this shape the question was presented
is the result.
Mr.. Brown of the South Capitol street
crematory is still dissatisfied with the way
iu which the garbage is delivered to the
furnace, and proposes to see that the terms
of the agreement are carried out.
GROUNDS OF COMPLAINT.
Mr.. Brown says that with proper de-
liveries his furnace can consume seventy
five tons OF garbage every day, but that
when 1t is carted in all at once at any
given hour in the day he cannot burn more
than fifty tons within the time specified,
and he so informed the Commissioners
when he filed his complaint against Mr..
Warfield's method OF delivery.
1t was agreed at that conference about
a week ago that the garbage should be
delivered at the rate of fifty tons per
day for a week or two, as a test, but
since then, Mr. Brown says, the supply
received has been irregular, sometimes
thirty tons per day, and as high as sixty
tons. but an average of but forty-fiye tons,
and this he is disposed to criticise.
All he asks, he says, is justice
J. R. Buckalew made recent appeal