Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1912-03-29
Mr.. Larnar's Reioinder.

Henderson law Why so, If he is satisfied
with his own handiwork in law-making
He virtually admits that he is the author
of every word of that portion of the Act
under which the railroad is permitted t
raise our Communication rates $3.50 yeaI
from Rockville to the District line. There
has been no criticism by me of that por-
ton of his law which fixed the fare zones
the authorship of which he credits to others
but am unable to see just how this helps
his case
While the railroad promptly appealed to
the courts, it did put the entire law, as il
left Mr.. Henderson's hands. into effect II
there was no mistake, as Mr.. Henderson
contends, and the rates were raised, does
he mean to say that he intended to accom-
plish the result stately was charitable
enough to credit him with mere mistake,
but in either event the commuters want
the law changed to give them back the old
rates, and we think we are entitled to have
Mr.. Henderson's assistance rather than his
opposition, especially so in view of the fact
that in the bill now pending the present
cash rate is preserved to everyone, whose
family or household in the aggregate make
as many as ten round trips to Washington
in year, upon the investment of only one
dollar for family ticket.
Mr.. Henderson endeavors to excuse him.
self on the ground that there were cOnsti-
tutional difficulties in making law to
control communication rates. but he admits
that he did in fact put such provision into
his law. If he made up his mind to put
in such provision. why did he not fix it
so that it would adequately protect the
commutersY He must admit that such n
provision would stand the tests of the
courts as well as the provision he did put
into it, which permitted the rates to be
raised.
He admits that in proper time offered
to him and insisted upon an amendment
which ] contended at the time would ac-
complish that very result, but he says:
Il Chez could not see then. and do not
see now. how the language of his (my)
bill meant anything"
Of course am not responsible for the
inability of Mr.. Henderson to grasp the
meaning Of that proposed amendment. but
in order for the public to understand what
it was will say that it provided that the
railroad should not charge greater amount
for Communication tickets over any one of
the three zones named in the bill than it
was then charging for tickets over that one
Of the four zones. then in operation, which
was situated next to Washington. the length
Of which was not changed by the bill. Mr.
Henderson, and everyone else familiar with
the testimony in the suit, now knows that
the railroad was then charging 2 1-8 cents
for Communication tickets over that fare one
zone. while the Henderson law permitted
it to charge, and it is now charging. IS
cents over that and each of the other zones.
1t does not take much of calculation to
show that the result is an increase from
$l.10 1-2 TO $l73 Is on each zone. This
may seem intricate" to Mr.. Henderson,
but have no fear that it will be misunder-
stood by your readers.
| do not mean to say that Mr. Henderson
could not solve that simple problem, but
he must have known that my amendment
would have surely accomplished the de-
sired result. AS understood him at the
time, he thought he was accomplishing the
same thing in different way. The COM
mutation books sold at that time contained
coupons for four zones in the county and
| one in the District of Columbia for each trip,
these cost $3.50 each from Rockville. There
was then no way by which either he or
myself could know whether the coupon for
the city cost us the same as those for the
different zones in the county or, in fact,
whether the coupon for the various zones
in the county cost the same for each zone
| feared what afterwards proved to be the
case, that the one in the city cost the more,
but whether it cost more or not. my amend
ment would have protected us. On the
other hand. with that superiority for which
the gentleman is distinguished. he, in some
mysterious way, satisfied his mind that
each of these coupons was sold at the same
rate. He then divided the $500 by the
five zones, which made the monthly ticket
for each cost, according to his calculation.
$l32, but as the Legislature could not pass
law for the city end Of the road. he de-
Quoted $l.32 from $500 and reached the
conclusion that the cost Of the book in the
county to Rockville was 1928 He then en-
deavored to get some general language for
his bill which would express this rate per
zone in round numbers and found that
"twO-thirds Of the cash rate" of Is cents
from Rockville was $500. which was only
cents less than he thought we were then
paying and adopted that as the language
of his bill.
As it afterwards turned out. the coupons
for the city we're rated and sold to us at
the ordinary ticket rate there. that is. six
for rs cents, and so Mr.. Hendersons basis
of calculation was swept away to the loss
Of every cOmmuter.
Mr.. Henderson may not think that these
facts warranted me in stating that he
made mistake. To my mind it was worse
than a mistake. II was an unnecessary
blunder committed with his eyes open and
after being duly warned Of the danger. He
asserted. with some feeling at the time,
that he would assume all fesDOnsibility for
the satisfactory working Of the measure,
but it now seems to get on his nerves when
the law is simply referred to as the Hen
derson Act.
The decisions Of the courts are meagre
and not entirely settled as to the validity
Of Communication rates fixed by the Legisla-
ture, but my opinion as lawyer is that
the Supreme Court will sustain such rates
when the matter gets squarely before It.
In this connection it may be said that Judge
Il