New-York tribune., 1920-01-24
are Increase
Denial Upheld
Upon Appeal
Nixon Without Power to
Grant Advance While Con-
tract Between City and
Company Is in Existence
May Nullify Other Raises
Right of Legislation IN
volved in Decision That
Reopens Whole Problem

The Appellate Division yesterday
. sustained the decision of Justice Finch,
of the Supreme Court, that Public
Service Commissioner Nixon is without
legal power to authorize increased
fares on the car lines of this city. The
action which produced this ruling was
for an injunction to restrain the Man
haitian e. Queens Traction Company
from putting into effect proposed in
crease of fare and to restrain Com
missioner Nixon from giving his con-
sent to such move. The injunction
granted by Justice Finch remains in
effect under the decision of the higher
court.
Justice Laughlin writing the opinion
Of the Appellate Division, said that
such an increase as contemplated can
not be made or approved by the Public
Service Commission so long as there
is a contract between the city and the
cent fare. Only the Legislature. said
the justice, has the power to authorize
such advance.
1t is likely that the matter will be
taken to the Court of Appeals.
May Nullify Other Increases
The opinion was declared by Cor
poration Counsel Burr to be of the
greatest Importance, since it might
operate to nullify action already taken
by Commissioner Nixon to increase
fares and abolish transfers.
II may ask Commissioner Nixon to
repeal his orders, or appeals may be
taken from them,' said Mr.. Burr. at
is my belief that the Legislature has
no power in such matters, and that the
entire authority to fix fares rests with
the Public Service Commission
The whole problem of higher fares
probably will be affected by the dcc-
sion, which is looked upon as the most
far-rcachng handed down in traction
matters in years. The court rules spc-
officially that the Public Service Com
mission has no authority to act on
rates.
1t was pointed out that the question
whether the Legislature could "de
prve the city Of it's reserved right to
declare the grant forfeited for charg
ing greater fare than was prescribed"
was one to be passed upon by the Court
Of Appeals.
The opinion says, in part:
"lf the commission has not jurisdic-
ton to entertain, hear and grant such
an application, then it should not be
permitted to make the city a party
thereto, as has been done, and to pro-
ceed with the hearing, as has been pro-
posed. In so deciding, however, we in
tend to criticism Of the commissioner,
and we express no opinion as to whether
the traction corporation should be re-
lieved from the provision of the grant
in question or should be held thereto
Those are questions for the Board of
Estimate. and perhaps for the Lcgisla-
ture, to decide.
Early Action Favored
"It is important that it should he
known without delay, and while thc
Legislature is in session, whether it IS
competent for the Legislature to au
thorize, or to delegate the power to
authorize. an increase in fare in such
cases and whether that can be done
without jeopardizing the grant.
"Doubtless the Legislature would
welcome and be guided by an express
sion of opinion by the court on these
questions, and with all the parties in
interest represented that might prop
erly be done, but in view Of the fact
that the Court Of Appeals has left the
points onen we should leave it to that
court in reviewing our order