The Monmouth inquirer., 1921-07-21
Chancellor Walker Says Court of
Errors Can't Be Modified to
Hear Utility Board
JUDGES Off ON VACATIONS
Resents High Courts Criticism = OBJ
Iects to Statement That It Made
Public Service "victim" In
Its Fare Ruling.

Juugl0enL OF Lue Suprtiuc CVuAt uiiCSt7
Ing The Public Utility Commission to
granr higher rate of fare than cents
to the Public Service Railway Compa-
ny.
L. Edward Hermann, as counsel, ap-
peared before the chancellor at the di-
rection of the Utility Board. The chan
cellor stated that 1t would not be pos
sible at this time upon such short no
tice to get quorum Of the 16 judges
court members, as many of the judges
are away.
Herrmann's application was based
upon the claim that the Utility Board
on July IA is required to hand down a
decision in the proceedings wherein the
commission will determine perma-
nent rate for the Public Service Rail-
way Company based upon valuation
of it's property made by Ford, Bacon &
Davis, engineers employed by the State
Valuation Commission. The supreme
court In an opinion by Justice Bergen
had ordered the so called emergency
appeal of the Public Service back to
the board in order to grant the compa-
nv fare higher than n cents.
ssUnder the law the board Is required
to tx just and reasonable rate In
the valuation proceedings within three
months after the report made for the
Valuation Commission is filed with the
board" said Hermann. "This report
was fled with the board on April IA, so
that the board must reach its determi-
nation by July IA. Under the judg-
ment entered In the supreme court the
emergency rate case Is remanded to the
board for rehearing, and by the opin-
ion the board is limited to reconsidera-
tion Of the evidence presented and
must not take any additional testimo-
ny. The supreme court in effect holds
that under this evidence the board al
low a higher rate Of fare than is now
charged.
"The board might reasonably reach
different conclusions and establish diff
farent rates to these cases hecanse the
factors required to be considered in the
two cases differ. To avoid this possible
conclusion the application to stay the
rehearing In the emergency case was
made"
Counsel Hermann fled with the
court of errors and appeals the rea-
sons upon which the board is appealing
to the highest state court to set aside
Justice Bergens decision in the SUI
preme court that the Public Service is
Immediately entitled to higher fare.
Among the errors assigned are:
That the supreme court erred in find
ing shat 1t was shown c0nclusively
that considerable part at least Of the
increased rate is just and reasonable"
That it erred in holding that ut is
Just and reasonable that an Increase of
rates should be made"
That it erred in holding that the fix
alton OF a just and reasonable rate
fought not to be postponed until the
board has reached a result in another
case involving the fixing of just and
reasonable rate based on the valua-
tion."
That 1t erred In holding that the rail-
way company was entitled to the cost
of operation and fair return ION cap
ital invested"
That it erred in holding that It was
entitled to any higher rate than it is
now receiving until the appellant fixes,
as it is required to fix under the stat
ute. Just and reasonable rate based
upon a fair value of the property used
and useful in the service of the public
Board Resents Criticism
In a dignified but at the same time
caustic statement the public utility
commissioners took exception to the
language used by the supreme court in
reversing the commissions order deny
ing the Public Service Railway a 10
cent trolley fare and announced its
purpose Of carrying the case to the
court of errors and appeals.
Tne indignation of the members Of
the commission has been aroused by
Justice Bergen's reference to the Pub
lie Service as having been victim
of the Utility Board. They assert that
1t is unjustified and Insist that the
commissioners in the handling of the
public's business are actuated by the
same high conception of duty that in
spires the members of the bench. The
statement Of the board was issued in
connection with the announcement that
the opinion of Justice Bergen would be
carried to the court Of errors for de-
termination of the question whether
the fixation cf a just fare is judicial
or legislative function. 1t follows:
s'The board proposes to take an ap-
peal from the order of the supreme
court In the application Of the Public
Service Railway Company for permis-
sion to charge 10 cent fare The
board considers the order Of the SUI
preme court is not warranted by the
law In that it orders the board to fix
a rate higher than cents upon the
evidence heretofore submitted. The
board contends that the courts power
is prescribed by the certiorari act and
BY Chapter 113O Of the laws Of 1918.
The latter restricts the courts power
ss to the boards acts to set aside any