The Bridgeport times and evening farmer., 1920-07-17
COURT HOLDS UP
JITNEY RULING
CONTINUED from Page one.)

CContinued from Page One.)
On the North and South Main street
line so per cent, on the East Main
and Boston avenue lines SO per cent.
and on the Brooklawn-Beardsley
park line rs per cent.
That $50 of the buses averaged In
value over $4,000, most of which is
being paid in installments of 500
month and that the banks of the city
held chatte1 mortgages on many OF
the buses.
He said that before a man could
operate q bus he was obliged to pay
in license fees, taxes and for permits
$s77.25, besides paying the usual
taxes.
The bus associations pay nine
starters, who are special policemen,
$35 and $40 a week each and a chief
starter. $50 a week.
City Attorney Conaley said that he
would admit that certificates which
were then offered in evidence would
show that the bus men would re-
ance were enforced.
Attorney Klein next introduced the
permit issued to one of the drivers
which showed that it ran to Jan. 1,
1921, and called attention to the or
igina1 ordinance which provided that
the police commissioners should Is
sue these permits which should be
valid until the first day of January
next succeeding their issue.
Assistant City Clerk Jones then
produced the original ordinance
passed by the aldermen.
Attorney Klein continued to press
his point relative to the new ordin-
ance being passed after conference
had been held with the trolley COM
pany, and asked if it was not true
| that the measure was put through
only after the Connecticut Co. had
agreed to continue to operate If the
ordinance was adopted.
Comley replied that the ordinance
was passed following an u1timatum
| delivered by the traction company, to
| the effect that service would be dis
| continued unless the jitneys were
| withdrawn from the streets.
"Isn't 1t so, that the ordinance was
| framed in order that the Connecticut
Co. should not withdraw its cars?'
| inquired Klein. LAS a matter OF
| fact neither the buses or the troll
| 1eys alone can carry the people OF
Bridgeport
The city attorney would not agree
| grounds that it was an inference
which could be drawn by the other
|
| side as we'll.
| In opening his defense of the in
| junction which was granted the jit-
| neymen, Judge Robert E. DeFores
declared that the only question was
| whether the temporary injunction
would be upheld until the septembe,
term of the Superior Court, at which
| time the case will be considered.
| "All we ask is that the court doe:
not dissolve this Injunction and de-
prive us Of our rights in the mean
| time" said the attorney.
Taking as the base of his conten
| ton, the ordinance which was pass
ed in June, 1919, Judge DeFores
| declared that every member Of thu
| jitney corporation has secured a Ii
cense from the police, and has thu
right to operate his machine on an.
street in the city until January 1
1921.
| The attorney continued at SOM
length to discuss the state laws ant
city ordinances governing motor We
hicle traffic, and concluded by sayin
that the passage of the latest ordi
nance has deprived the jitneymen o
their natural, original and veste
rights.
These men have secured license
under the original ordinance" declar
ed Judge DeForest- They have Sc
cured licenses which are issued by tn
state and they have their natura
rights as citizens, which allows Their
to use the public highways in an
city or part OF this state.
This attempt on the part of tn
city to rescind from it's original ordi
nance is illegal, unconstitutional an
conflicts with the laws OF the state.
my opinion, therefor, this temporar
} injunction should not be dissolved.
Judge DeForest argued that tn
Connecticut company should be com
spelled by pnandamu1 to operate thei