South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1922-05-02
BUS ORDINANCE OF
CITY IS LEGAL, Is
BELIEF OF JURIST
Judge Funk Rules in Fight for
Injunction Against
South Bend.

Authority az the city of South
! Bend 90 regulate iutcruroan bus line
business insofar a. 10 prescribed GER
tain streets over which BUSES may
enter the city viii be upheld. 10 wa
indicated by Judge Walter a. Funk
IN circuit court Monday morning.
The judges ruling came ln CON
nection with the iujunctlve reIet
sought by the Elkhart and South
Bend bus line against the city TO
have an ordinance declared prohibit
tory and unconstitutional. In the
Hght OF Judge Funks ruling the
injunction viii probably Doe denied
and interurban buses compelled TO-
enter the city via routes prescribed
by the council
Tax Clause Questioned.
The ruling in reality has 20 do
with competition between the inter
urban railway company and the ln-
ferurban bus lines. The ordinance
protects the utility company .u that
30 prevents the busses from Operat-
INK within the city limits ON the
same streets upon which are located
the interurbau lines.
the last term of court. Judge Funk
indicated Monday that the ordinance
reguIatluG this traffic s valid except
for the $500 tax provided This fel-
ture- thc court held. iu view of the
fact that J goes into the general
fund instead OF highway fund. CON
stitutes a property or double tax.
The court further ruled that the
License fee is legal The license fee.
he said. was a toll for the use OF
! the city's streets by common car
'riers and could be prescribed at the
discretion Of the common council.
Ruling Tuesday
The effect of Judge Funk's ruling
will probably be to deny the injuuc-
ton and uphold the validity Of the
ordinance with the one exception
previously indicated. An order viii
be entered Wednesday at which time
Judge Funk will rule on the bond
provision Of the ordinance providing
that the inter-city carriers must be
sufficiently bonded 90 protect pas
sengers in event of accident.
Judge Funk declared that the
council probably passed the ordin-
ance with the view OF limiting the
congestion on certain streets. The
court digcessed from the evidence
and said that the interurban bus
business was merely In its infancy,
and that already competitive lines
had come into the field. The coun-
Gil he added. probably had this de
velopment in mind when 10 passed
the ordinance regulating the APP
proaches 10 the heart of the city for
the busses.
Defines Vehicles.
In ruling on the various conten-
tions OF the litigants. Judge Funk
held that the ordinance was legally
published. an insertion in a news
paper constituting sufficient public
notice lie differentiated between
city buses and interurban busses In
that Il is not the size or weight or
physical construction that determines
its classification but the character OF
the use 10 which the vehicle is put
and the prices charged for riding
thereon.
The court held further that valid
basis for classification between city
and interurban buses was a cause
for the performance of different
service and charge different prices
The court ruled that trucks hauling
gravel and merchandise are temper
arv and Incidental and unlike that
Of interurban bUsses.