Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1915-07-27
FIGHT TO FINISH ON
JITNEY ORDINANCE
(Continmed from First pneel

JlI NE1 URDlNANCE
Continued from First Pnge)
| day. The other owners will Keep their
| cars in garages until some other course
of action is determined
ATTACKS ORDINANCE AS
DISCRIMINATORY AND UNFAIR
| The bill asking for an injunction.
which MIR. Byrd will present to one
OF the judges in the city to-day. Mt.
'aeks the ordinance as discriminatory,
| injurious and unfair to the jitneys."
IL compares the ser"ice rendered by the
liineys with the Virginia Railway and
| rover Company. which il terms ms
me dominant street car company Of
inc city. and makes scathine
arrangement of the alleged efforts az
the company to put the jitneys out of
business. first, through applica ton TO
| the courts for an injunction to restrain
/ 'hem from operating and then by its
| efforts in securing the passage OF tho
| present ordinance TO accomplish tbe
result under the suise of regulation"
the ponce do not act in enforcing
'he ithey ordinance to-day. the pro-
ceedines In the Police Court Will be
as an owner lis taken before Just,ce
Crutchield charged with violating its
provisions
Last night Mr.. Byrd had not deter
mined which judge he would appIy to
for an injunction.
BYRD ATTACKS MOTIVES oE
STREET CAR COMPANY
One OF the allegations in the bill,
"hich To some extent indicates its
tenor, Mr.. Byrd said, Is a review of tha
efforts OF tho Virginia Railway and
Power Company to secure iniunctions
TO prevent the operation of iitneys
The company first applied to Judge
Beverly T. Crump for an iniunction
and, when refused. took the case he
fore the Supreme Court which was
then in session
When the company failed in its Of
torts to destroy the jitncy busses by
court orders said Mr. Byrd, at con-
Hchtrated its energies upon the CITY
N"uhcil 10 procure an ordinance which
VIII destroy the jitneys under the
suise of regulation. and in these efforts
they were successful"
The chief point on which we ask
for tho Injunction" continued the at
torncy, is that the ordinance is dis
criminatory injurious and unfair 10
the Jitneys. There are other vehicles,
known as taNicabs. autos and hacks
ior hirc, which are unrcgulated. There
is no diHercncc IN the fundamental
service rendered. Both use the streets.
poth charge for transportation, and the
only difference is that the iitncy
charges less money for similar service
and serves larger number OF people.
GENERAL PURPOSE
The only difference between the jit-
neNs and the cars of the Virginia Rail-
way and Power Company is that the
latter are run on rails and operated by
power outside of themselves but the
pnoIc purpose is exactly the same
mat is, the transportation of passen-
gers throughout the city
nevertheless this ordinance was
passed under the guisc of regulation
practically prohibiting the jitneys by
the requirement of bond of 81. 600
This bond cannot be given by the aver
age jitncy owner lie is confined to
certain routes to which the taxicab Is
not restricted. Passengers are not per.
united to stand upon the platform Of
the cars. which is not true of those OF
inc railway and power company, nor
! is the railway and power company re-
! CURED to give bond. No bond is re
| CURED or the automobiles or hacks for
| hire, either.
The whole ordinance &c diroctod a.
the destruction OF the jitneys under
7 the SuiSc OF regulation because tbev
compete with the Virginia Railway and
! Power Company"
WHEELWRIGIIT SAYS
I STATEMENT rs ABSURD
Nhcn the attention of Thomas S.
( Wheelwright president OF the Virginia
Railway and Power Company wa.
. called yesterday to IA statement made
! by Mr. Byrd In regard to the alleged
activities of the company In securing
/ the passage of the iitney ordinance by
the city Council. he said:
4 IN. statement declaring; that the
lithey ordinance which becomes cffec-
/ i've tomorrow, was passed by the
/ Council AT the direction Of the Vir-
/ slnih Hallway and Power COMPANY. is
. absurd and is very serious reflection
upon the members of the Council of
, the city of Richmond"
Mr. Wheelwright pointed out that the
regulation in the ordinance of the city
hurdtnSome in its requirements than
are the regulations effective in many
other cities, In which the iitncy Is
regulated as public carrier. In New
. Orleans. the jitney ordinance require.
an indemnity bond Of $1,000. and this
- ''''"''Sc' Nv WAS recently
hel6 by the Supreme Court OF Louisiana
/ In san Francisco a bond OF 10000 /,
required. Other cities were cited where
III" bond ranges from $4,000 to $40. 0oo
The license applied for by the Motto,
! transit Corporation for It's ten car,
names the Grove Avenue route, while
that OF the electric bus OF the stree,
car company takes the Monument Ave
nue. route. The applications were FLEE
WIN the Commissioner Of Revenue late
yesterday afternoon, and because NJ
the several formalit!es TO he complfot
WIN, including the execution OF n bono
or $1,000 for the first car and $500 10,
each additional machine. approved bv tba
CITY Attorney. the license will not he
Issued uDtil this morning
DEATHS.
-----~---
: