Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-11-12
'0NE FARE OR TWO?
Issue Between Street Rail-
ways and Suburban Residents.
HEARING OF ARGUMENTS
Interstate Commerce Commission to
Give Decision.
DENIAL OF JURISDICTION
Traction Companies Contend the
Question of Interstate Commerce
Is Not Involved.
DENIAL OF JURISDICTIONS

Whether residents Of Somerset. Drum
mond and Friendship Heights. Nd. will
have to pay the street railway companies
one fare to and from their home and
Washington. or continue to pay two fares
will probably be decided by the inter-
state commerce commission in a few
DAYS
Oral arguments were heard by the com
mission yesterday afternoon in the case
of the citizens of the suburban communi-
ties named against the Washington and
Rockville Railway Company, the George
town and Tenleytown Railway Company
and the Washington Railway and Electric
Company, in which it is charged the tax
of ) cents for the ride from Somerset
to the District line and conversely a dis
tance of less than half mile, Is excess
sive. cxtortionate and unwarrantably eX-
orDitant
Plea of Compliments.
Attorney Charles ID. Drayton. counsel
for the complainants. cited that for elev-
en- years prior to 1910 passengers were
carried for one fare from Somerset over
the District line into Washington. He
contended Jurisdiction of the commission
is established by the fact that through
cars are run over the line of the Wash
ington and Rockville Company past the
District line, without change of cars.
conductors OF motormen, the business,
therefore, being interstate and not in
trastate. He also set forth that the
three defendant companies are managed
by the same officers and controlled by
the same board of directors, and stated
that the Washington Railway and Eiec-
4yi. 7, i'm
crates all three roads. owning all the
stock of the Washington and Rockville
line anG three-quarterS of the stock of
the Georgetown and Tenleytown COM
pany.
Railway Companies View.
The contention of the Washington
Railway and Electric Company and the
Georgetown and Tenleytown~ line. as set
forth by Attorney George n Hoover, is
that the commiss. on lacks Jurisdiction in
the case, claiming interstate commerce
is not involved. Mr.. Hoover stated that
no through tickets are sold from Wash
lngton to Somerset or any point in Mary
land; that the railway company has no
knowledge of where a passenger is going
when he boards a car and has no means
of finding out. He declared, there is no
law in the District necessitating the is
ton linee and the Georgetown line at SD
and streets. but that transfers are
given free voluntarily.
He also commended that the fact that
there is a physical connection between
the Georgetown line and the Rockville
Inc at the District limits does not es-
tablish interstate commerce as no div
sion of charges by the two carriers is
shown or in effect Hee stated the de-
PENDANT companies are separate and dis
tinct corporations, Notwithstanding that
the stock of one Is controlled by the
other. or that motive power for the differ
ent lines is derived from the same source.
Not Interstate Business.
Attorney William III. Talbot, represent
ing the Washington and Rockville line.
denied there was any interstate business
in the transportation of passengers over
the lines in question. He sa. d the cars
of one line are operated under rentals by
the other. and that the power used Is
computed and paid for in proportion
also that the crews of the cars are paid
by the different companies only for the
service rendered while on their respective
tracks. He contended any ruling pro-
vid.ng for free transportation would be
confiscatory.
Attorney Drayton, in replying, asserted
10 cents. or a car ticket and cents is
the joint rate charged for continuous
ride from Somerset into Washington
Clearly proving the interstate nature o.
the transportation. Numerous author-
ties and decisions were cited by the at
torneys in their arguments. .