Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1915-09-28
JTTNEY ORDINANCE
ATTACKED in COURT
Michael F. Doyle Declares Re-
cent City Regulation Is
Unconstitutional

The legality and the usefulness Of th'
city's utney ordinance were attacked II
Court OF Common Pleas No ! today by
Michael Francis Doyle, representing two
associations Of jitneymen. in an appeal &c
have a permanent injunction granted
against the legislation. In addition to
presenting witnesses who testified that nc
profit could be made II they operated
cars for flve-cent fare over the routes
prescribed by the ordinance, Mr.. Doyle
set forth two arguments. He said:
The ordinance is illegal because It
discriminates. An Assembly act gives
Councils power to regulate traffic and
to regulate motor vehicles. The ordi-
nance which we oppose regulates only
one class of motor vehicles-motor-
buses
II the law were enforced and jit-
neymen operated cars In accordance
with its provisions, its ostensible OBJ
ject would not be fulfilled. IL would
concentrate jitney traffic on Market
and Broad streets, two crowded thor
oughfares, instead of permitting IL to
be diffused in part to such streets as
SD, Diamond and Allegheny avenue.
The life of Ford touring car, in or
dinary use, is one and a half years, with
out overhauling, testified Carlton B. Stel-
ton, Of the Ford plant in this city. Such
a car will last only six months without
overhauling and rebuilding, when used
as a iitney. he said.
Jltneurs were attentive when Judge Pat
terson asked n question which was re-
garded as significant, in view of the fact
that the city ordinance names "jitney
busses' as the vehicles to be regulated.
do you make jitney busses?' he asked
Stelton.
mo" was the reply.
Have there been many busses in opera
tion," he inquired. and was told that
there have been only one or two machines
on the streets with bus tops.
Many witnesses were called by Mr..
Doyle to prove that ii would be impos-
s!ble for the owners of automobiles TO
operate them according to provisions of
the ordinance. He contended that the
city law was intended to regulate, but
instead Councils had IL drawn in such
way that it meant death to the busi-
ness in Philadelphia if the car owners
were compelled to comply with its pro-
visions. The long hauls. for a nickel, Mr..
Doyle said, were unreasonable.
Jessie F. Smink, of 1888 North 18th
street, has been operating his car under
the provisions of the ordinance, and he
told the court that he was losing about
s. day. He said 1t cost him $40 a day
to operate, and that he could not collect
more than about IS since the majority of
the jitneys have been driven from the
streets.
Mr.. Smink has not been compelled to
take the passengers over the long routes,
provided by Councils, for a nickel as
that portion of the original injunction was
permitted to stand by Judge Sulzberger
when he vacated the remainder a month
ago, after the Jitney Auto Service Com
pany failed to place its bof1d for $25OO to
assure the costs of the case.
Among the others to testify were Will
liam A. Magill, president of the Philadel-
phia Jitney Association; Philip Caesar,
Joseph Cox. Andrew Javreys and Jacob
A. Youngblood The case will be con-
tinued tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock.