The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1911-12-27
TRANSFER FIGHT
HAS TWO ANGLES
NOW TO FOLLOW
Universal Exchange Act by
Congress or Extension
of Car Line.
CONTINUED from First Pase.)

CONTINUED from First Page.)
smith street to M street and west on n
street southeast to intersect the Capita
Traction Companys line at the Nav,
xaros Eighth and M streets southeast
also to extend its line north on EIev
enth street from NJ street to East Cant
tai street. there to intersect with IN,
metropolitan Railroad Company, now
the washington Railway and Electri,
Company.
These extensions were never made b,
the Capital Railway Company. but not.
withstanding that fact colonel Armes
through his counsel. contended thai
section Of the act. which provided 70,
transfers from the Capital Railway
Company lines to the lines of the othe,
TWO railway companies, means tina,
there shall be reciprocal transfer rela.
lions between the Capital Traction Com.
pany and the Metropolitan Railroad
Company or its successor. Section ;
reads:
That the Capital Railway Com
cpany, the Metropolitan Railway
CSmpany. and the Capital Traction
issue free transfers' at tea fSe po,n ne
of Intersection, Of their respectiye
lines, SO that for the payment OF
pne i sheu passenger on either
riding over the lines OF BOTH"
Ralston's Argument.
Attorney Ralston argued that in
asmuch as no common point of In
tersection IL named In the section the
only construction IL that .any point"
was meant by Congress. Also he
contended that It was the intention
OF Congress to provide free transfers
from the Capital Traction Company'x
lines to the Washington Railway and
Electric Company's lines as well as
from the Capital Railway Company's
line to the other two lines.
A nis Interpretation was opposed by
history Of the act and outlined its
purpose, maintaining that the SHE
object OF section 3 was to provide
na ssan Tor the TRANSPORTATION Of
Gompany,s suburban line to the city
lines; He also urged that 1t was
clearly the purpose of Congress to
tha cine .ne transfer point as regards
the Capital Traction COMPANY at
Eighth and M streets Southeast ana
me transfer point Of the Capital
~
Washington Railway and Electric
company at Eleventh and East Capitol
Basis of Suit.
Damages in the sum of 10 cents arr
sought by Colonel Armes because he
was refused a transfer by a conductor
to change from the Washington Rail-
way and Electric Company's line at
Seventh and F streets northwest to
the Capital Traction Company's line on
seventh street. 1t was never contem-
plated In the act in question that there
should be transfer point at Seventh
panies involved In the suit should ex-
change transfers. argued Attorney
Hoover.
Both attorneys made brief arguments,
confining themselves to a discussion OF
the act Of May IS. 1896 Attorney Hooy-
err submitted copy of the opinion of
Justice Wright, OF the District Supreme
Court, dismissing the suit of the re-
ceiver of the Baltimore and Washington
transit Company to compel the Cap
ital Traction Company to exchange
transfers at Fourteenth and Kennedy
streets northwest, the counsel saying
several points In the suit at bar were
covered by the upper court.
Originally Colonel Armes sued for $40.
but In order to prevent an appeal he
reduced the amount to 10 cents, hold
ing that 1t was a matter Of principle
with him. However. It is understood
that II IL still possible for the District
Supreme Court to take cognizance Of
The matter should Colonel Armes win
his suit.