The Washington herald., 1914-01-11

TAXI COMPANIES
file AN APPEAL
Action Means Courts May Be
Called Upon to Define
Common Carriers. "
LONG FIGHT IS EXPECTED
Federal and Terminal Officials Would
: Get Around Public Utilities Com,
missions Decision.
LONG FIGHT IS EXPECTED

4
Terminal Taxicab Company late yester
day afternoon filed an appeal to the Dis
trict Suprcr Court from the decision
OF the Public Utilities Commission rem
dered last monday. holding that the tw'
companies are common carriers an,
| therefore rust furnish the commission
| year ago.
The appeal was filed with Col. Cheste
A. Harding. Engineer Commissioner, ant
Conrad H. Syme, corporation counsel anS
general coi1sei for the Public Uulitie,
Commission Thomas u. Dunlop, attor
ney for the Terminal Taxicab Company
and Samuel V. Hayden. counsel for tn,
Federal Tsxicab Company, are the sign
ers.
Action Causes. Surprise.
This action, which came as a surprise
as 1t was generally believed that the two
concerns -oal- conside- the Public Util.
tiles Commissions ruling as final. 1t IL
predicted. means the beginning of a Ions
legal fight. The case against the com
panies waich grew out Of reports pub
lished In The Washington Herald yeaI
ago. to the effect tina. they were over
charging tn. public, will now be carried
into the Courts.
The appeal OF the two companies Is
further said to indicate that they are
determined to fight Ito finish.'' as was
predicted in The Washington Herald OF
last Monday
Incidentally an interesting situation
may arise as consequence of the con-
tention upon which the taxicab compa-
MES are to base their appeal from the
commissions decision. l. may result in
a protracted and complex battle over
the definition of the term common car
rier"
The Federal Taxicab and the Terminal
Taxicab companies will claim that they
are not common carriers; further. that
to be declared SO by the courts would
mean the destruction of their business.
II they were common carriers. they will
argue, they would be compelled. as Is
a street car or a railroad, to serve any
one agreeing to certain reasonable con-
ditions.
Argument of Companies.
Interpreted in everyday language, the
.lega' argument of the concerns will be
this:
Suppose John Smith, prominent bust
neJ man. hires a taxicab to take him
to certain point; suppose when the cab
has covered a certain distance, John
jones, colored laborer, signals the
driver of the cab to take him some
in the same direction IN
v hich Mr.. Smith is going-then the
driver would be compelled under the law
tc take the colored man into his cab, no
matter il this would result in displeas-
ure on Mr.. Smiths part
The taxicab companies. so their coun-
sci asserts would not only lose their
customers but also their drivers if this
state of affairs should arise.
The legal battle is predicted to be as
heated as il will be strenuous and in
volved.
Harry Davis, of 1913 T street, and Ray
mond Maloney. of Isl Maryland avenue.
both engaged .'in the business of renting
automobiles" last night were cited to APP
pear in the Police Court tomorrow morn
ing to explain why they are insisting on
leasing their machines in front of the
Ebbitt. the authorities claiming that this
is a violation of the decision of the Public
Utilities Commission that taxicab COM
panies are common carriers.
Both Davis and Maloney claim the right
to lease their machines for rent at any
place in the city they desire. They added
they insisted on doing business in front
of the Ebbitt for test case" II found
guilty of violation of the commissions
decision, they said they will appeal their
cases