The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1913-04-02
COMMUTERS MUST
FORK Up TWO FARES
STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION
UPHOLDs WITHDRAWAL OF
TRANSFERS.
WINGFIELD OLSEN T S
SAYS 1T HAS No POWER TO ANNUL
OR SUPERVISE ORDINANCES
ENACTED by THE CITY
OF RICHMOND.

Reversing its own decree( Of 1900
compelling the privilege of transfers
between the city and the Seven Pines
car line. the State corporation COM
mission yesterday, Judge WingfieFd
dissenting. denied the petition of citi
zens asking for a re-establishment of
that privilege, since abrogated. on the
ground that the city ordinances re-
Gently enacted since the change in
ownership of the Seven Pines line per-
NIT are contracts which permit the
withdrawal of this privilege. which
the commission has no power to an
nuI or supervise.
In his dissenting opinion Judge
Wingfeld holds that no city ordinance
can take Supersedance of State statutes
which vest in the comission the regu
lation of all railways, and he sees no
reason for reversing the decree COM
pelling the transfer privilege.
VIII BE Appealed.
The case, which called forth the
last decision from the commission is
entitled the Commonwealth of Viz
gipia in J. r. Dowden vs. Richmond
and Rappahannock River railway
company and Virginia Railway and
Power company, will probably be APP
peaied To the State Supreme court,
which affirmed the previous decree Of
the commission compelling the trans
fer privilege.
Ever since the construction of the
line to Seven Pines the Virginia Rail
way and Power company has issued
to passengers travelling in both d.
rections transfers at 29th and Z
streets. In January. 1904, the COM
pany owning the entire line, gave
notice that on and after the LIST day
of February the transfer privilege
would he abolished. Proceedings were
instituted In the name of the Com
monwealth of Virginia in William e.
Oakley against the railway company
to compel the continuance of the
transfer privilege, and this petition
the commission granted, the Supreme
court affirming its decision.
Ordinances Hold Good.
In July. 1912. the Seven Pines sec
ton of the line was transferred by
sale to the Richmond & Rappahan-
mock River Railway company, and
the transfer privilege again abrogated
on the strength of certain ordinances
passed - the city council which were
adopted, ii is said, as an encourage
ment to the development of the old
Seven Pines line to the river. Judges
Prentiss and Rhea hold that these
ordinances are in reality contracts
between the municipality and the
Virginia Railway and Power company
and that city councils are vested with
the power to regulate railways oper-
atlng upon the streets and within the
city limits: that the transfer privilege
was originally derived from an ordi-
nance passed December %. 1899, and
that this ordinance, having been
amended. the privilege no longer ex-
lists. The commission does not be-
lieve ii has the power to annul the
action of the city authorities devel~
oped in this case, and while admit
ting that 1t has jurisdiction in the r.
& r, X. affairs. holds that 1t would
be unjust to require the latter road to
accept transfers held by travellers
leaving the city, when the city council
has relieved the Virginia Railway and
Power company from the obligation
OF accepting transfers from travellers
entering the city.
The majority opinion of the COM
mission holds, further, that no con-
tiict exists between constitutional pro-
Continued on Third Page.)