Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1921-07-15
CITY J|TN[Y BOND
IS NOT REQUIRED
TO GET CERTIFICATE
Department of Public Works
Adopts Automobile Regu-
lative Principle
INTERPRETS MEANING
GOOD FAITH SECTION
Accepts Bond Requirement as Matter
for Enforcement by Municipal
Authorities

The department of public works
in an order filed Saturday granting
certificates of necessity and conven-
fence to both the Barker Motor COM
pany and the Porter & Richards
company for operation of stages be-
tween Everett, Stanwood and Mount
Vernon makes it's first announcement
of the regulative principles adopted
In relation to automobile transport
tation under the law of 1921. Both
companies were operating passenger
carrying stages over the same routes
described on January Is, 1921, by
which they are by law entitled to
certificates of necessity If operating
their stages in good faith before and
on that date.
The Seattle, Everett and Mount
Vernon stage line protested the good
faith qualifications for exclusive
rights on the grounds that the two
companies had not complied with the
iitney bond of entering and leaving
stations within the limits of cities Of
the first class.
Department Makes Ruliag.
Since the attorney general had
held prior compliance with the mn.
nicipal jitney bond requirement is a
condition of good faith upon stage
companies entering first class cit'as,
It II thought that the department Of
public works decision to Disregard
lished before the present certificate
the requirements as to lines estab.
Of necessity act became effective will
Be the basis Of litigation, upon the
part Of the contesting stage lines.
On this the department rulings on
the Mount vernon-Everett contest
states:
1--WE are not inclined to hold that
failure to procure bond under the
law prior to January Is, 1921, must
necessarily faint the operator with
Z had faith and preclude the issuance
OF . certificate under chapter Ill of
the session laws Of 1921. There is
such . diversity OF opinion even
among lawyers a. to whether the re-
Auirements Of chapter 81 of the 1915
laws apply to stage companies which
merely enter city limits for the pur-
pose Of receiving and discharging
that It would seem harsh to hold that
every such operator who failed to
iprocure bond was necessarily ope-
rating In bad faith. We hardly be-
lieye 1 layman should be penalized
tor failure to comply with statutory
provisions when lawyers Of standing
and ability doubt the application of
the law to his case.
WfIlful Violation Different.
"A willful and inexcusable viola
tion Of the plain statute or ordinance
Affecting the operation would present
Z different question.
This latter conclusion Is as nearly
as the department undertakes an
expression as to whether present fail
ure OF stage companies to comply
with the jitney bond law on routes
entering first class cities will be ac-
cepted by the department as a lack
Of good faith. The jitney bond re-
Quirement is accepted as matter of
municipal enforcement and where a
stage operator had resisted its en-
fOrcement by municipal authority,
and the municipal authority had been
sustained in enforcing the require
ment, the stage company's refusal to
procure the jitney bond would be a
matter involving good faith in an
action before the department of pub
lie works determinative Of right to
operate upon the state highways I'M
der the certificate OF necessity act.
ION further question Of good faith
operation, the department formally
holds. in its first ruling under the
certificate Of necessity law, that II a
stage company was conducting its
business in the manner that stage
companies at that time were accus-
toned to operate, rendering fairly
efIicient service and maintaining
schedule that would reasonably meet
requirements Of the travelling public
ct the time and place in question, it
was operating in good faith. Den
sity OF traffic, character of roads. eli
matte conditions and other elements
make it necessary to consider each
case on its own merits"
Your camp fire.