Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1911-09-26
RwETRANSFER CASE
BEFORE BOARD OF
UTILITIES TODAY
Interpretation of State Law
Expected from Body
at Session.
COUNSEL FOR MUNGLE
REPRESENTS THIS CITY
Ruling on Disputed Question
Looked for at Meeting
This Afternoon.

Facts regarding the violation by the
Public Service Corporation of the re-
cent double transfer order of the Pub
lie Utilities Commission were laid be-
fore thai body at Trenton this after
noon. Joseph G. Wolber, representing
William Mingle, president of the
Board of Works, alleged that the Pub
lie Service was wilfully ~disregarding
the Public Utilities Commissions or
der. After citing specific instances,
he said:
The complaint is made by Mr.. Mum
gle in view of the fact that a writ OF
certiorari reviewing the boards order
in this matter has been allowed by the
chief justice, but since the writ does
not operate as a stay, and in his view
the boards order is not being obeyed
in all respects, Mr.. Mungle feels that,
pending an adjudication by the courts
of this State, the Newark travelling
public is entitled to all the benefits
the order and decision of your honor
able board was intended to give them
In other worls, Mr.. Mungle wants
ouble transfers until the Supreme Court
lirects otherwise. As the matter now
stands, the public gets no benefit from
the transfer order. and II may take the
court a long time to reach a decision.
Mr.. Wolber opened his argument as
follows:
80 much confusion has been devel-
oped in the minds of the Newark trav-
cling public as to the extent and cop
of the boards order in the above mat
ter, due in a large measure to the man.
ner in which the Public Service Rail
way Company has attempted to COM
ply with the same, coupled with certain
regulations which 1t has imposed to
restrict the transfer privilege, that Mr..
BIungle has felt it to be incumbent
Upon him o lay the full facts before
the board for such action as it may
deem advisable in the premises.
1.-THE complaint of Mr.. Mungle is
principally based upon what appears
to him to be an effort on the part OF
the Public Service Railway Company to
wholly ignore that portion of the
boards order made under date of Au-
gust 18th, 1911, and effective on Sep
TENDER 5th, 1911, which finds that the
company is legally bound to give a
transfer emitting the passenger to a
continuous ride in either direction on
any street railway line i~ntersecting
with or connecting with, the line upon
which said transfer was given
ITO use the language of the order,
that the requirement to give such
transfers may not be restricted or de-
limited to a line that may take the
passenger without further change to
his ultimate destination, but that trans
fers must be given on any intersecting
or connecting line that advances the
passenger continuously toward his ul-
innate destination. even though a re-
transfer is required to bring him to his
ultimate destination
Instances may be multiplied in
which the passenger under the present
manner of observance by the Public
Service Railway Company of the
boards order is obliged to take the
longest and most indirect route to his
destination, ofttimes necessitating
change at the Four Corners in order
to make his journey upon the pay
ment of one fare, and from a transport
tation standpoint requiring increased
unnecessary hauling by the carrier.
Criticism is also made of the manner
in which the carrier announced to the
BhDilt pllOi " otpltIllDtI 81 lJili IL lt-
striction to limit the use of a transfer
to the first car of the connecting or in
tersection line to which the passenger
is transferred. The notices used were
printed p%lacards pasted up in the cars
and in the following language:
Transfers will not be received for
passage unless the passenger offering
same boards the first car of the line
to which he is transferred at the des-
ignated transfer Junction
ut will be seen that no provision is
therein made in case the first car of
the connecting or intersecting line is
crowded and the car ful1' sigr is dis
played in conformity with the city
ordinances. Under the circumstances
a strict enforcement Of the rule Is I'M
just and likely to arouse contentious
between the public and the carriers
servants"