The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1916-09-12
Concert Today
BY the Engineer Band, at Gar
field Park, at 1850 P. NJ.
-
Frank J. Weber, Leader.


ginia without intermediate stop in the
District of Columbia. No freight bust
ness whatever II carried over It's rail-
road In the District OF Columbia, and
no passenger or freight traffic Is trans
ported by II from one point to another
In the District Of Columbia. Therefore.
II il apparent that this commission has
no Jurisdiction over the rates Of the
washington and Old Dominion railway railway
the Public Utilities Commission Of the
District OF Columbia, which Jurisdiction
and authority Is limited to traffic trans
ported from one point TO another within
the District Of Columbia.
controlling and conclusive reason. that
the matter Of the regulation OF all fares
charged by the Washington and Old
Dominion railway for transportation OF
trict Of Columbia Is unquestionably un-
der the exclusive Jurisdiction of the In
terstate Commerce Commission. and that
all such fares are fully covered by
tariffs on file with, and approved by.
that commission under and In accord
ance with the act to REGULATE commerce
approved February 4. 1887. an act amen
datory thereof and supplemental there
to.
Now Before I. c. c.
-. The Interstate Commerce Com
against recently issued tariffs Of this
company involving the very point indi-
Gated as the Issue presented by your
letter Of August 25. 1916
"Inasmuch as we are sure that your
commission 10 conversant with the def
mite position which has been taken by
the Supreme Court Of the United States
as to the Jurisdiction Of the Interstate
Commerce Commission being In control
where such jurisdiction has been put II,
operation relative to the particular mat
ters at issue. we refrain from making
this statement longer than to suggest
that the commission will surely appre-
c1ate the embarrassment to which n re-
spondent would be placed II compelled
to present its defense to questions OF
this character and submit Its evidence
to one tribunal In advance OF the reg
dlar hearing OF the same before another
tribunal, even II the facts or issues
could be considered legally cosnizabie
by each.
Traction Company Supports Stand.
The Jurisdiction of the commission
also was questioned by the Capital Trac-
ton Company In a statement submitted
by Attorney G. Thomas Dunlop.
The company argued further that II
celingjoint rates for the reason that the
transfer arrangements were discon'
tinued by the Washington and Old Do
minion railway, and that notice OF the
time Of such discontinuance was not had
by the Capital Traction Company unit
midnight Of the day before 1t was put
into effect"
The Capital Traction Company. 1t was
stated. IL without power to compel the
Washington and Old Dominion Railway
to continue or put into effect tho trans
fer. arrangement.
Referring to the question Of jurisdic
ton. Conrad II. Syme. general counse
for the commission. defended the posi-
ton OF the commission In Its claim that
It's supervision over the lines Of thu
Washington and Old Dominion railway
extends to the south end of the Aaue
duct bridge.
Position of Board.
Memoranda OF court decisions show.
ing that the territorial limits OF the
District extend to the Virginia shore
were presented by A. Leftwich Sinclair
representing the Chamber of Com
merce.
The position OF the Public Utiiltie.
Commission, II was stated at the begin
ming Of the hearing. Is that while 1t !,
| without Jurisdiction In the matter oil
intrastate travel, It's supervision doei
extend as far as the south end OF tho
Aqueduct bridge. and that In discontin
uing transfer relations to that poin
both traction companies rendered them
selves subject to Investigation under tn.
public utilities law.