The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-03-11
WILL PAY THREE CENTS
MANY CITIZENS READY TO STAND BY
THE NEW CAR-FARE LAW.
Speculation as to the Course the Com
pany VIII Take-CnnnOt Get
an Injunction.

There Is considerable interested specula-
ton as to ultimate results of the three
cent-fare law and as 10 what course VIII
De pursued by the Citizens Street-railroad
Company with reference to it 1t Is sup
posed that as soon as the law goes INTO
effect. which will be when the acts of 1881
are printed and proclaimed by the Gov
ernor. that the company will select some
man TO make a test case. The question
then arises as to whether the operation OF
the law would be suspended while the case
was pending in the courts, and whether
people will have to go on paying five-cent
fares until IL is finally decided, perhaps by
the United States Supreme Court, as there
seems to be an impression that the COM
pany will undertake TO get the case into the
federal courts in preference 10 those OF the
State, il for no other reason, because 1t
would take longer to get final decision.
Attorneys are divided on this question.
Some say that if the decision of the nisi
prius court were adverse TO fhe company
that the decision holding the legal fare TO
be three cents would be binding until II
was set aside by the upper court and that
the company could not compel any person
TO pay more than three cents. On the other
hand, IL thS lower court held the new Jaw
invalid. some attorneys say that there Is no
way b. which patrons could compel ihe
company TO accept three-cent fares while
the case was pending i'm the upper courts.
There are other attorneys who say that IN
no event would the operation OF the law be
suspended while the case was pending in
either the lower or upper courts and that
the company would be compelled to accept
three-cent fares, unless it were TO resort TO
the extraordinary relief of an injunction
suit for an order restraining every man,
woman and child in indianapolis from at
tempting 10 ride for less than five cents.
IL Is said that it might be necessary for
the company 10 apply Tor the appointment
of receiver in order TO attain this end,
on the grounds that IL was about TO become
insolvent as result of a law cutting on
40 per cent. OF its gross income. If re-
ceiver were appointed il would be a simple
step in the receiVership proceedings for the
court to order the receiver not TO accept
less than five cents and restraining any per-
son from attempting to ride for less. Any
person violating u restraining order would
DE in contempt OF court and liable TO i'm
prlSOnment. IL Will be remembered that re-
straining orders were issued by the federal
Judges TAT Chicago against the strikers in
the famous Pullman strike and that +. V.
Debs went TO Jail for violating such an Or
der.
Naturally enough, there is more interest
In the one question, is indianapolis TO
manner in which that question is TO be de-
termined. So strong is the sentiment along
this line that numerous prominent citizens
nave declared their intention of rendering
three cents for a single fare with the ex-
pectation of having il refused and of being
elected when they decline to pay more.
with a law requiring the company to ac-
cept three cents quite a number OF people
believe that they would have meritorious
cause of action for personal damages in
case they were TO be elected. Aside from
the fact that the Citizens Street-railroad
company would find ii difficult thing TO
employ enough conductors to eject every
person VINO tried 10 ride on the cars. the
company would find itself flooded with dam
age suits. provided the expressed intentions
were carried out. Without doubt the courts
VIII nave some interesting points 10 decide
On what grounds the street-car company
VIII seek to attack the law in court is not
known. After shifting its position on the
lower-fare question while the two street-car
bllis were pending in the late Legislature
counsel Tor the company came forward with
s snv Piat that IL actually cost three and
over its lines and that il could NOT nav
operating expenses and fair dividend on
the investment at such a rate Of fares. To
require 1t TO do So they said, would amount
10 a c0nfiscatiOn of the company's property.
IL may be that the company will make this
held unconstitutional III So the court
might take into consideration the severa 4
i i doLars or watered stock in consider
lhS what KIND or earnings the company
might be legitimately expected TO make
~ might lie with the court to say whether
the company should have its ability to pay
or not pay dividends on inflated stock con-
siuered as sufficient reason for the plea
that the investment was not a reasonab ly
paying one. 1t is said, however, that If the
vVihpdhy were TO undertake 10 prove that
It's revenues had been cut below a living
pront by the law, the court would hear
evidence as to the increased traits on ac-
count or the reduction. A good many per
spplS DeIleVe IL would be easy to show tina I
me som panys traffic would be doubled or
treDled IN very short time. without IFS
expenses increasing at the same ratio. Some
atIpqrnSys tnlnk that the company will at
tack the law as unconstitutior1aI bacauso :,
SEEKS 10 alter contract already existing
when contract IL will try TO show becomes
vested right for the term thereof