The evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1907-1908, 1907-09-10
P. R. R. DEFEATS
2-CENT FARE
LAW IN PA.
-
Act Declared UncOnstitn.
tiOnaI by Lower Courts.
Case Will Be Appealed.

PHILADELPHIA. Sept. ~10.Judges
Wilson and Audenried. in Common
Pleas Court, today declared unconsti-
~tutional the two-cent railroad fare law
passed by the last Legislature. TIL
case upon which the decision was made
will be at once taken to the State SUI
preme Court.
The two-cent fare law was enacted
by the Legislature as q result of agita-
ton during the last political campaign,
all parties pledging themselves in
of such legislation. The railroads. led
by the Pennsylvania n Reading, made
a strong fight against the enactment of
the law, but both branches of the Leg
islature passed the bill with practically
an unanimous vote. The law was to
go into effect on October /.
The Pennsylvania was the first to att
tack the law, bringing a suit in the
local courts to restrain the county of
philadelphia from collecting the fine for
violating the provisions of the act. The
hearing in the case lasted nearly a
week, and among the witnesses were
President McCrea and several of the
the vice-presidents of the Pennsylvania
Railroad.
The contention of the company was
that the law was not constitutional.
and that the two-cent rate was fixed
without any investigation on the part
of the Legislature as to whether the
railroads could make a fair profit I'M
der the law, which the company asserts
it cannot do.
All other railroads operating in Penn
sylyania have also brought similar
proceedings in various counties Of the
State, but no decisions have been rem
dered, as it is generally understood
that the Pennsylvania suit will be
made the test case in the higher courts.
The law is declared unconstitutional for
the following reasons:
L. As a regulation by the Legislature OF
the rates of fares for passengers on the
lines constructed by the plaintiff under the
act of April 10. 1886, between Harrisburg
and Pittsburg and Pittsburg and Erie. the
act violates an existing contract between
the plaintiff and the commonwealth. and
so contravenes article l. section 10 of the
constitution of the United States.
2. AS a regulation of the plaintiffs intra-
State passenger business in its entirety,
the act under existing circumstances is
unreasonable and confiscatory. and. by de-
priving the plaintiff of its property with
out due process Of law. violates amend
ment XIV. of the. constitution of the
United States.
s. Since the IdklDB 1TOfu Ii Pluluilil u
the profitable use of its property invested
in the intra-State passenger business may
be regarded as taking quoad hoe of that
Just compensation is made therefor, the
act violates article 1, section 10 of the con-
s~titution Of Pennsylvania. :
A. Viewed as an alteration or revocation
of the plaintiffs franchise to establish<and
enforce over the lines of roads that. are
now operated by it, and that haye been
May 3. 1855, SUCH rates. As, Within the
maxima fixed by the second proviso Of
section 81 of the act of April 13, 1916, its
able. the act under consideration violates
Article XVI, section 10, of the. constitu-
tion Of Pennsylvania, because it does an
sylvania Railroad Company by establish
ing so low a maximum rate of. fare for
t het i braneSS Of q tb psS pfaigtiff,s a business sG ssn onr
remunerative, but providing no compensa-
tion for the loss thereby occasioned.
Under the head of plaintiffs requests
for findings of fact" the court affirms
that:
THAT the method used in ascertainlag
tn expense of handling the compliments
intrastate passenger business is the correct
one.
That the percentage realized under ex-
listing rates of fare. upon the cost Of the
property is not unfair or unreasonable, aud
that the percentage under the new la "
would not be fair or properly compensa-
tory.
THAT cost Of conducting railroad busi-
ness for several years has been greatly
and constantly increasing.
THAT a reduction in intrasthte rates will
most probably compel a corresponding re-
duction in interstate rates. a
That the averate rate per mile for car
rying intra-State passengers does not now
exceed two cents a mile.
'Hhaf FndnCtinn nf IN foc mould - - In
likely to lead to increase of business.
That a uniform rate of two cents could
not, In all probability. be obtained from
all passengers. and is neither advanta-
geous to the public nor just to the COM
pany.
That there is no evidence that the Leg
islature investigated the matter before
enacting the law
In the defendants request for findings,
the court refuses the following:
I'm determining whether the maximum
rate. as specified in the act. is improper,
all the traffic and receipts of the PLAINTIFF
within the State and subjected to the con-
troll of the Legislature. must be taken into
consideration. The passenger traffic cam
not be segregated and considered without
reference to receipts from the express and
freight traffic and all other sources of cor
porate earnings"
Officials of the Pennsylvania Railroad
were pleased when they learned that the
new law had been declared unconstitu-
tional. None of them cared to publicly
comment on the decision, however. The
decision rendered today applies only to
the county of Philadelphia. The law be-
comes operative on October 1, and in order
to have a decision that will cover the
entire State, it is the intention of the
Pennsylvania Railroad to ask the Supreme
Court to take action on today's decision
lhafora thai data