The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1903-11-20
MR., O|CKEY
WINS OUT
Gains the Penalty
Besides His
Point.
Supreme Court Decides
Rapid Transit Co.
Did Wrong.
Judge De Bolts Decision Re-
verssd-Scant Encouragement
for Abuse Of Privilege.

Lyle "A. hickey mas Won MS suit
against the Honolulu Rapid Transit
Company for recovery Of the 500 pen
atty on account of a conductors refus-
al to give him a certain transfer.
Judge De Bolts decision in favor of
the defendant corporation is reversed
by the Supreme Court, with directions
to the Circuit Court to render judgment
for the plaintiff for the amount
claimed. 1t is a unanimous opinion of
the appellate court, written by Justice
Perry. Mr.. Dickey appeared in per-
son, and Castle 81 Wilmington for the
defendant.
The syllabus of opinion giving the
law of the case is as follows:
A passenger on the cars of the Ho-
nolulu Rapid Transit & Land Company
may not lawfully be charged more than
five cents for a continuous ride from
the corner of King and Keeaumoku
streets, along King, McCully, Beretania
and Alexander streets to Wilder ave-
| nue.. Such passenger is entitled,
without the payment of an extra fara,
to transfer from the King street to the
McCully street line and to receive a
transfer ticket therefor.
THE CASE STATED.
At the outset the opinion states the
case. 1t is shown that the plaintiff
sued under Sec. of Act SO, Laws of
1898 (the Rapid Transit Cos franchise
statute), to recover of the defendant
the sum of one hundred dollars for an
overcharge alleged to have been made
by the defendant on April z, 1903. while
the plaintiff was a passenger on it's
cars. After laying down the various
routes of defendants tracks, the opin-
ion says:
AT the corner of McCully and King
streets. the overhead wires We're not
connected. The plaintiff entered an
+ east-bound car of the defendant on
King street at the corner of Keeaumo-
ku, paid five cents as his fare and
asked for g. transfer ticket to a. car
going mauka on McCully street. This
request was refused. At the corner OF
King and McCully streets the plaintiff
left the King street car and entered
the first car on McCully street going
mauka and left the latter at the cor
ner of Wilder avenue and Alexander
street. While on the last mentioned
car the plaintiff was charged and paid
an additional sum of five cents as fare.
1t is for this alleged overcharge that
the action is brought. The facts of
the case are undisputed and the only
question is whether under the provis-
ions of Act So the defendant could law
fully refuse to give the transfer ticket
demanded and charge an additional
fare on McCully street.
Then the governing section of the
law is quoted, which provides fare
not to exceed five cents for continI
uous ride anywhere between Diamond
Head and Moanalua, or makai of
line drawn parallel to the sea coast
and one and a half miles distant thera-
FROM with half fare to children going
to and from school; also for transfers
from one car to another on such con-
tinuous trip, upon connecting line
within the limits above mentioned
also for regulations by the corporate ton
with the approval of the Governor,
and, finally, the penalty of 800 for an
overcharge.
MOTT pTTITpN rTpTD