Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-03-30
TO TEST VALIDITY
OF TRAFFIC RULES
Attorneys Wish Courts to Pass
on System Promulgated
by Commissioners.
BELIEVE ACT OF 1906
STILL CONTINUES LAW
Power Given District Heads in
Earlier Years Superseded
Is the Claim.

A case to test the validity of the new
traffic regulations, promulgated by the
District Commissioners, and effective
February /, is being planned by attorneys
having clients charged under these regu-
lations. The test will come on a motion
in the Police Court to quash an informa-
ton charging a violation of one of the
new traffic regulations on the ground that
they are invalid. If the court allows the
motion, the new rules will be nullified.
An appeal probably will follow, the cor
poration counsel seeking to have a higher
court overturn the ruling of the Police
Court judge.
Blocked by Williams.
Attorney Robert I. Miller. who has
had more than twenty-five clients who
have been charged with violations of the
new regulations. has declared his be-
lief that the recent traffic rules would
be abolished if the matter were brought
to the attention of the court He has
attempted to file motion to quash each
information as it is brought into court
he says. but has been blocked by AS
sistant Corporation Counsel Robert L..
Williams. he entering recommendation
OF personal bonds or nolle PROSE- every
time there Is likelihood of a contest
Attorney James A. O'Shea is another
VINO believes the traffic regulations under
winch the police are now making arrests
are invalid. Mr.. OShea said yesterday
that he was positive the act of Congress
providing traffic regulations, although it
was followed later by regulations made
by the Commissioners is still in force
Both the traffic laws of Congress and
the traffic regulations of the Commission
hn In t.
Mr.. OShea said. II should think the DO
lice regulations for the government of
trafnc, which went into effect February
l, are invalid. In fact, I'm positive of it,
Judges Withhold Opinion.
Judge Pugh, who has Jurisdiction
over these cases, and before whom such
motion to qVash would be argued, re-
fuses to commit himself regarding the
validity of the regulations. Judge Null
lowry. who will preside in this branch
of the court after April /, also refuses
to give an opinion. as he has not looked
into the matter fully.
The basis for the contention that the
new regulations are not valid, it was
learned last night is that the act of
Congress which gave the COMMISSIONERS
power to make and enforce traffic reg
ulations has been superseded by a more
recent act of that body, which made
rules for the conduct of traffic in
Washington.
Decisions in the District Supreme
Court and the Court of Appeals are cited
by those who support the contention that
the regulations are void, wherein it has
been held that law covering the same
ground as a previous one while it NAV
not expressly state that the old one
is thereby repealed, nevertheless repeats
the older law automatically.
Hold Law of 1906 Effective.
1t appears to be a fact. say opponents
of the new regulations, that in 1887 and
in 1902 Congress did empower the Com
missioners of the District to make and
enforce regulations for traffic, but by an
act in 1906 Congress itself made traf-
fic regulations.
In support of this position those who
hold it cite a case in which the Dis
trict Court of Appeals held that certain
regulations regarding the conduct of
pawnshops were null and void by rea-
son Of later act of Congress on the
subject. In this case, it is held, the court
ruled that the former act was auto
matically repealed by the later act.
In the event that the court should
hold that the new traffic regulations are
invalid. some attorneys say the traffic
regulations provided for the District by
Congress in 1906 would Immediately go
into effect again.